TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

Model X Anti-Theft Mechanism

Discussion in 'Model X' started by eepic, Aug 7, 2014.

  1. eepic

    eepic Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    854
    Location:
    Canada
    NHTSA granted the Model X an exemption from typical anti-theft device standards earlier this week, it goes on to describe the Model X (and therefore Model S?) anti-theft system. And confirms at the very least the MX will have door handles.

    Federal Register, Volume 79 Issue 150 (Tuesday, August 5, 2014)

    Here's part of it:

    Under 49 CFR Part 543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to
    grant an exemption for one vehicle line per model year. In its
    petition, Tesla provided a detailed description and diagram of the
    identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft
    device for the Model X vehicle line. Tesla proposes to install a
    passive, transponder-based, electronic engine immobilizer device as
    standard equipment on its Model X vehicle line beginning with its MY
    2014 vehicles. Key components of the antitheft device include an engine
    immobilizer, central body controller, security controller, gateway
    function, drive inverters and a passive entry transponder (PET). Tesla
    also stated that the new design of its immobilizer device will have
    enhanced security communication between its components, prevent
    tampering and provide additional features to enhance its overall
    effectiveness.
    Tesla further stated that in addition to its immobilizer device, it
    will incorporate an audible alarm (horn) as standard equipment, but
    will not include a visual feature with the alarm system. Tesla stated
    that forced entry into the vehicle or any type of entry without the
    correct PET will trigger the audible alarm. Tesla further stated that
    in addition to an access through the doors, the alarm will also trigger
    when a break-in is attempted to either the front or rear cargo areas.
    Tesla further explained that its antitheft device will have a two-step
    activation process with a vehicle code query conducted at each stage.
    The first stage allows access to the vehicle when an authorization
    cycle occurs between the PET and the Security Controller, as long as
    the PET is in close proximity to the car and the driver either pushes
    the lock/unlock button on the key fob, pushes the exterior door handle
    to activate the handle sensors or inserts a hand into the handle to
    trigger the latch release. During the second stage, vehicle operation
    will be enabled when the driver has depressed the brake pedal and moves
    the gear selection stalk to drive or reverse. When one of these actions
    is performed, the security controller will poll to verify if the
    appropriate PET is inside the vehicle. Upon location of the PET, the
    security controller will run an authentication cycle with the key
    confirming the correct PET is being used inside the vehicle. Tesla
    stated that once authentication is successful, the security controller
    initiates a coded message through the gateway. If the code exchange
    matches the code stored in the drive inverters, the exchange will
    authorize the drive inverter to deactivate immobilization allowing the
    vehicle to be driven under its own power. Tesla stated that the
    immobilizer functions to ensure maximum theft protection when the
    immobilizer is active, the vehicle is off and the doors are locked.
    Tesla stated that it will incorporate an additional security measure
    that performs when the car is unlocked and immobilization is
    deactivated. Specifically, immobilization will reactivate when there
    are no user inputs to the vehicle within a programmed period of time.
    Tesla stated that any attempt to operate the vehicle without performing
    and completing each task, will render the vehicle inoperable.
    Tesla's submission is considered a complete petition as required by
    49 CFR 543.7 in that it meets the general requirements contained in
    543.5 and the specific content requirements of 543.6. In addressing the
    specific content requirements of 543.6, Tesla provided information on
    the reliability and durability of its proposed device. Tesla stated
    that the antitheft device will be upgraded with a more robust design
    than the antitheft device already installed as standard equipment on
    its Model S vehicle line. To ensure reliability and durability of the
    device, Tesla conducted tests based on its own specified standards.
    Tesla provided a detailed list of the tests conducted and stated that
    it believes that its device is reliable and durable because it complied
    with its design standards. Additionally, Tesla stated that it has also
    incorporated other measures of ensuring reliability and durability of
    the device to protect the immobilizer device from exposure to the
    elements and limits its access by unauthorized personnel. Additionally,
    Tesla stated that the immobilizer relies

    on electronic functions and not mechanical functions, and therefore
    expects the components to last at least the life of the vehicle or
    longer.
     
  2. timf

    timf Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2013
    Messages:
    899
    Location:
    Michigan
    From the sound of things it is exactly the same system that is used in the Model S. The door handles will likely be the same retractable type as the Model S despite the prototype having dummy handles that don't extend. I'm not sure what part of the usual standard requires exemption, but it likely is tied to features that only apply to gas-powered engines.
     
  3. Krugerrand

    Krugerrand Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2012
    Messages:
    4,271
    Location:
    California
    Rottweiler-2-2.jpg

    Comes with every X.
     
  4. bonnie

    bonnie Oil is for sissies.

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    14,241
    Location:
    Columbia River Gorge
    Hahah! That anti-theft mechanism works really, really well.
     
  5. JST

    JST Active Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2013
    Messages:
    1,506

    You can't leave it enabled with the windows up in the summertime, which is a bit of a problem.
     
  6. AnOutsider

    AnOutsider S532 # XS27

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    11,923
    Yup, then the break in becomes justified in many jurisdictions.
     
  7. bonnie

    bonnie Oil is for sissies.

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    14,241
    Location:
    Columbia River Gorge
    Oh gawd. Don't start. We just got that thread settled down.
     
  8. JST

    JST Active Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2013
    Messages:
    1,506
    "Officer, I had to break in. His alarm was going off!"
     
  9. bonnie

    bonnie Oil is for sissies.

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    14,241
    Location:
    Columbia River Gorge
    You guys are impossible.
     
  10. JST

    JST Active Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2013
    Messages:
    1,506
    Impossible? No, just determined. You might even say...dogged.
     
  11. chickensevil

    chickensevil Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2014
    Messages:
    4,134
    Location:
    Virginia, United States
    The puns are strong in this thread.

    Great find on the exemption, I would love to know what is actually different about the two systems (between the S and X).
     
  12. EchoDelta

    EchoDelta Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2012
    Messages:
    732
    Location:
    Seattle, Planet Earth
    Wondering if any changes in design come from something they may have learned from the defcon challenge. Hm.
     

Share This Page