Some of the posts in this thread are quite ridiculous and laughable. Sometimes reading things people post on the internet makes me seriously concerned for the well being of society in general. Seeing the same nonsense here, over something relatively trivial, just baffles me. But whatever. Such is life on the interwebs...
In any case, I don't think anyone at Tesla is "out to get me." I do think someone made a poor decision in attempting to downgrade my car's firmware last night vs simply contacting me. At least a few people involved with the firmware already had my contact information, including my personal email and direct cell number, should they had been inclined to contact me. The decision to do the firmware downgrade
obviously didn't come from the top, not that I never thought it had. I was, admittedly, certainly a bit irritated about it at the time.
As far as I'm concerned this situation is done with, and will only need to be revisited if when the next OTA comes down I don't actually ever get it. I don't expect that to happen at this point (Tesla undid the push for a downgrade when my car checks for updates, as mentioned earlier), and I'm pretty sure it's not going to be an issue going forward, based partly on Musk's comment earlier, among other things.
As for white hat efforts on reporting actual security exploits to Tesla, including one pretty nasty remote exploit (resulting in a firmware update that could be called "wk057" on
Hank's site I suppose), I'll point out that I'm in the top 5 on Tesla's bug bounty "Hall of Fame" (with additional not yet rewarded submissions pending review that will probably push that to top 3 soon enough) as a result of my private submissions to Tesla. I've thought quite a bit about whether or not to publicly disclose any of these exploits even after sufficient time has passed after Tesla has fixed them and pushed the fixes. As of now, my stance on that is to keep them private indefinitely. The reason being is that there are going to be people driving these cars stuck on older firmware for a long time unless Tesla makes it possible for owners of salvage vehicles and the like to upgrade to the latest version with the latest security patches. I think that would be the right thing to do eventually, but for now it doesn't seem rational to release any exploits, or even descriptions of some of them, while even one car in operation could be susceptible. My receiving recognition for discovering an exploit isn't worth potentially opening up an owner to problems. If that's not a good enough window into my personal stance on things and my intentions surrounding my efforts, then I don't know what is. Sure, I might talk a little **** sometimes, but I'm just never going to release anything that's going to be a security concern for anyone.
So, for now, I'm going to chalk all this P100D stuff up to being triggered by a mistake on my part (not salting the hash) and Tesla making a mistake in their reaction, until I have evidence to the contrary. Right now, my car is sitting on 2.13.77 (latest public firmware), and I expect it will update normally from now on.
Additionally, I'm going to write an apology to the few contacts I have at Tesla for whatever trouble I've caused with my unintentional information leak. I'd like to hope that I'm at least a moderately valuable ally to Tesla, overall.
Anyway, carry on with the regularly scheduled over analyzing and radical tangents. I'll try to stay out of the way.
I certainly won't be talking about ea0890697a77af0a2e054cccec587c8a42feb5cf38e778c6c6e2a96bfb945c0b, or bb0347a468d97e98a9c00e37cebec1ab930f6f1221cae0f1fbb92b07e1900ba2, and especially not 3c01eba119e00d79c82b6f65d70bc5f1044d568618bf41377e6d1432023fc2b8.
