-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla has allegedly activated a selfie cam Driver Monitoring System
- Thread starter shrineofchance
- Start date
linux-works
Active Member
re: "the images never leave the car"
you guys do know that tesla does not erase all user data and tracks when they scrap a vehicle? the secure-erase concept apparently does not exist in tesla.
so I need more assurance that its also not _retained_ inside the car.
I'm not asking for code review - I know tesla will never release code. but I'd like a bit more security in tesla before they take the big leap to start taking internal cabin photos.
fwiw, most of the e-cars don't do a good job on secure erase. even your reset-to-factory button does not secure erase things. telsa is sloppy and is known to be that way.
you guys do know that tesla does not erase all user data and tracks when they scrap a vehicle? the secure-erase concept apparently does not exist in tesla.
so I need more assurance that its also not _retained_ inside the car.
I'm not asking for code review - I know tesla will never release code. but I'd like a bit more security in tesla before they take the big leap to start taking internal cabin photos.
fwiw, most of the e-cars don't do a good job on secure erase. even your reset-to-factory button does not secure erase things. telsa is sloppy and is known to be that way.
but all of this sounds like Tesla/Alexa/Google/iPhone/Android/etc. are not for you.... How do you know Apple dumps your data after you destroy/sell/return your phone? Or Google? How do you know they aren't recording/transcribing every call? Sure, they say they don't.
I get what you're saying, but it's an odd place to draw the line. Tesla is a 100% connected vehicle with constant internet access, tracking by Tesla themselves, and active mic for voice assistant, they even upload video from your cameras to help them with training the AI and leaning about edge cases - all of which it did when you bought it... but you draw the line at the driver camera? I'd be more concerned that they know when I am at every moment than seeing me pick my nose at a light.
You 100% for sure should be given the switch to turn off the feature (or put tape over it), but like I said - odd place to draw the line.
You need to get the flip-phone of cars if you want assurances. And even then the on-board computer can be dumped after and accident to know whether you were actively steering/accelerating/applying the brake/etc.
But my privacy on a car that tracks your every movement and can be monitored on any cellphone is a rich form of gaslighting.
linux-works
Active Member
I'm not an apple user, so I dont know much about them other than what is 'known' about them. they have a decent track record of privacy due to their business model.
google, otoh, swallows your privacy. but I am not buying a google car, google powered car or even really android 'public' (its telsa's private android build) in the car.
now, the 'what-about-ism' aside (ahem), everyone I know covers up their camera window on their laptops. even the old CIA director was known to do this
its a known thing and most people like having control over when their image is captured.I already explained (either here or in another thread) some of the dangers that could happen if you allow images to be taken while you are driving, and if an accident occurs, the images of you may not be the best defense of your innocence. I'd rather just not have that attack vector enabled.
lets see how it plays out over the next few years, shall we? its a bit too soon to assume its problem-free, in all the ways you can think of problems happening.
rxlawdude
Active Member
linux-works
Active Member
that's called 'encryption at rest' and if data is not going thru a network connection, it should be encrypted. and proper encryption should require the user be able to set the private key. if that is done, then the architecture is clean and safe. I cant be sure that tesla does that now; I know they didn't used to do that and data was recovered from crashed cars, with shocking results of what was saved.
vendors can do a much better job; but even still, I dont want to enable things that I dont think are really needed. I'm not willing to pay for 'no hands, ma!' driving at the expense of having images taken of me, like I'm some subject to be monitored. I feel its dehumanizing and wont have it. I'm 'of that certain age' (lol) where I don't find video cams pointed at me to be at all 'cute' and if they aren't needed (zoom for work: needed), then I don't play.
keep the wheel nags for those of us who bought the car with that feature and let the others 'go forward' if they think the eye sensor is moving forward, for them. everyone could be happy as long as tesla does not force the use of the camera for existing AP/L2.
linux-works
Active Member
nope, not at all.
camera pointed at me. the default is to assume there will be privacy and other issues, not to assume nothing.
[biden_accent]come on, man![/biden_accent]
rxlawdude
Active Member
Sorta like needing to assume there will be a small whiny contingent of naysayers. Not to assume the vast majority of owners are happy.
Didn’t read post all the way through, but a lawyer issue to stop people from engaging auto pilot and jumping in the backseat like dumbasses.
With that said, how are the geniuses at Tesla going to know when I’m wearing sunglasses???
Must be using other metrics and movements of head to know this? I wear dark sunglasses that are prescription....yes also in the grocery store, I’m that badass.
That video is hardly a test posted.
With that said, how are the geniuses at Tesla going to know when I’m wearing sunglasses???
Must be using other metrics and movements of head to know this? I wear dark sunglasses that are prescription....yes also in the grocery store, I’m that badass.
That video is hardly a test posted.
Last edited:
The thing I don't get is, this is just another tool like the steering wheel nag. You're being monitored there too. Same with your presence in the seat of the car with a pressure sensor, whether your seatbelt is latched, the exact amount you press the accelerator, turn the wheel, your speed, location, etc. All of that is there to 'monitor' the driver.
So it's the fact that this sensor is a CCD rather than something else? What if it was a 3D reconstruction of your face done with structured light a la FaceID on iphone - so it wasn't a "photo" but a render? What if the image never left the sensor in the mirror, and it only output a binary "eyes forward" signal?
Well... it's been around since about 2006 starting with Lexus. So it's been 15 years now.
Also, in the EU, they already have a regulation for such systems. it say it has to be done in "....such a way that those systems do not continuously record nor retain any data other than what is necessary in relation to the purposes for which they were collected or otherwise processed within the closed-loop system."
If such a regulation were adopted in the US, would that be sufficient?
linux-works
Active Member
regulation does not stop hacking attempts.
again, attack vector that I see only downsides to, if bad things happen.
I'm not willing to pay that price for the very slight convenience of not having to respond to nags.
I also feel strongly about biometrics. people cannot change their face, their fingerprint like they can a password. from a security POV, using biometrics is also hella stupid, but people are convinced to trade this for that and so, here we are.
you are welcome to join that biometrics club. I'm not. but you go right on ahead. no one (not me, certainly) is stopping you.
but just don't ask me to come and join your club. you play with your toys and I'll play with mine. dont ask me to play with your toys. I will not
(appologies to Hitchens...)
again, attack vector that I see only downsides to, if bad things happen.
I'm not willing to pay that price for the very slight convenience of not having to respond to nags.
I also feel strongly about biometrics. people cannot change their face, their fingerprint like they can a password. from a security POV, using biometrics is also hella stupid, but people are convinced to trade this for that and so, here we are.
you are welcome to join that biometrics club. I'm not. but you go right on ahead. no one (not me, certainly) is stopping you.
but just don't ask me to come and join your club. you play with your toys and I'll play with mine. dont ask me to play with your toys. I will not
(appologies to Hitchens...)
I hadn’t seen Elon or Tesla make any mention of the cabin camera yet.
Nm. Just realized this was a "joke".
So this remains a puzzling story. (A) Why is it apparently only impacting radar-less vehicles so far? And (B) why is there radio silence from Elon/Tesla about this potentially huge change in AP/FSD strategy 5 days after the news broke?
Last edited:
Hm. That would be surprising.
What software version are you on? And do the release notes make any mention of activating the cabin camera?
So far, I've only seen it reported that 2 software versions mention cabin camera activation in their release notes: 2021.4.15.11 and 2021.4.18.1. And the TeslaFi Firmware Tracker only shows North American Y's with VINs >184XXX and 3's with VINs >963XXX on these 2 software versions. (I.e., brand new 3/Y's, which likely corresponds with the small population of newly radar-less 3/Y's.)
GlmnAlyAirCar
Active Member
I could certainly be wrong here as it is just a hypothesis. I came up through the forth-octet branch (most recently 4.15.10) but recently merged back into the 4.18 branch. Of course none of this would have been in the release notes as it is software under test and I am certain still backed up by radar (and hence no restrictions). According to greentheonly this particular branch was running the "cutting edge."
As soon as I got the software from this branch a few months back, I began receiving multiple forward collision alerts in places where I had never gotten them before (when we know forward collision was triggered by radar). Objects in my way that trigger forward collision are large tree stumps and a convex mirror that assists someone pulling out of their driveway.
So, I can't be certain this is running (primarily) pure vision, but the above observations are consistent with pure vision, and the timeframe overlaps the development of pure vision very closely.
I agree, aren't there other cars, think I've owned one or two, that pickup/look at your eyes and have driver attentiveness alert that have been around a pretty long time?
Don't see what the big deal is...as others mentioned. Seat belt weight sensors for children/airbag disabling, put your seat belt on. You are drifting off your lane, car ahead wake up!!! Beep Beep...person/object behind you!!!
Just because it is looking at your head/face, not a big deal. There is likely so much of this stuff people haven't thought of that is lying in wait to be enabled over the air they would be surprised what is in store in the future.
Don't see what the big deal is...as others mentioned. Seat belt weight sensors for children/airbag disabling, put your seat belt on. You are drifting off your lane, car ahead wake up!!! Beep Beep...person/object behind you!!!
Just because it is looking at your head/face, not a big deal. There is likely so much of this stuff people haven't thought of that is lying in wait to be enabled over the air they would be surprised what is in store in the future.
Barklikeadog
Active Member
There will be no privacy, Tesla has already crossed that line.
Look at every accident that makes news. Tesla takes the data, what the driver was doing every second, and puts it out there for all to see, and declares driver error. The deceased driver isn t 6ft under yet. I don't understand how the drivers actions, habits, etc are ok for public consumption at Tesla's whim.
Similar threads
- Question
