BMW Traps A Car Thief By Remotely Locking His Doors (cnet.com) 368
An anonymous reader quotes CNET:
Seattle police caught an alleged car thief by enlisting the help of car maker BMW to both track and then remotely lock the luckless criminal in the very car he was trying to steal... Turns out if you're inside a stolen car, it's perhaps not the best time to take a nap. "A car thief awoke from a sound slumber Sunday morning (November 27) to find he had been remotely locked inside a stolen BMW, just as Seattle police officers were bearing down on him," wrote Jonah Spangenthal-Lee [deputy director of communications for the Seattle Police Department].
The suspect found a key fob mistakenly left inside the BMW by a friend who'd borrowed the car from the owner and the alleged crime was on. But technology triumphed. When the owner, who'd just gotten married a day earlier, discovered the theft, the police contacted BMW corporate, who tracked the car to Seattle's Ravenna neighborhood.
The 38-year-old inside was then booked for both auto theft and possession of methamphetamine.
The suspect found a key fob mistakenly left inside the BMW by a friend who'd borrowed the car from the owner and the alleged crime was on. But technology triumphed. When the owner, who'd just gotten married a day earlier, discovered the theft, the police contacted BMW corporate, who tracked the car to Seattle's Ravenna neighborhood.
The 38-year-old inside was then booked for both auto theft and possession of methamphetamine.
Happy ending, but (Score:5, Insightful)
Good for the guy who got his car back, and good that they put the would be thief away, but still, can't say I much like the idea that our corporate overlords can track your car (and therefore movements) and remotely lock down your vehicle.
Dangerous (Score:5, Insightful)
People died while being locked in cars.
Two examples are : car fallen in the water, and people sleeping in a car while owner and friend locked it. The owner came back after a long hot weeken, his friend was dead inside.
Double lock is a dangerous feature.
Re:Dangerous (Score:4, Insightful)
What danger ? (Score:5, Interesting)
In an emergency, you're supposed to be able to break a car's side windows.
I supposed the "sun-cooked" guy had passed out (alcohol ? heat shock, while he was asleep ?) before realising he should get out of the car.
I'm more surprised that the thief didn't try to break out of the car. But, on the other hand the lock has happened while he was napping inside the car, so he might not have realised what had happened and did not release he should run away as fast as possible before the police arrives.
I would be much more worried about the remote disabling of the car :
- was some form of owner's access required in order to do the disabling ? (i.e.: the owner's second fob is needed in order to validate the instruction to lock and ignore the stolen fob ?)
- or does any sufficiently high executive at BMW have the power to shut down any random car ?
Also : is the remote access limited to very simple instruction (locking doors and revoking fobs - which as mentioned above shouldn't be dangerous except under special circumstances) or can the car be remotely shut down while it is driving ?
Re:What danger ? (Score:4, Informative)
You'd probably cut your hands up pretty bad if you succeeded. I'd lie on my back and try and kick the windows out. Your legs have far more power than your arms, and you're generally wearing shoes.
Re:What danger ? (Score:4, Informative)
You'd probably cut your hands up pretty bad if you succeeded.
Car windows are tempered glass. You might end up with a few scratches but it's not the bleed out scenario of normal glass.
Re:What danger ? (Score:4, Funny)
Hit car glass hard enough and they lose their temper.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Every headrest is detachable, and has the sharpish point that is supposed to be used in case of water entrapment. Older cars should have a screwdriver in the glove box. They are cheap.
Re: (Score:2)
This is why you should have an emergency hammer in your car, preferably one with a belt slicer in the handle.
Re:What danger ? HAMMERTIME (Score:3)
Yes, hammers look like stupid overkill. But people die in flash floods, often of underpasses. How? If the car stalls out because the water is deeper than expected, you or weaker family members will not be able to open the doors due to water pressure. If you don't get the windows open (due to hard rain?) before the power to them dies, you will have to break windows or drown. Nasty progressive trap.
Re: (Score:2)
This is why you should have an emergency hammer in your car, preferably one with a belt slicer in the handle.
Another cheap bit of insurance is a spring loaded counterpunch. I have one in all of my vehicles.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you ever tried to punch through a window? I don't think it's as easy as it is on TV. I guess you can use a belt buckle to help, but you still probably injure your hand. Anyone know?
That's why in my car I keep a knife that has both a seatbelt cutter and a point for breaking windows. Never know if I will be trapped in the car or if I ever have to help someone out of theirs, so it's good to have in case of emergency. Worth the $20 price tag [amazon.com] IMO.
See the Mythbusters on Youtube. Pointy object. Edg (Score:3)
Mythbusters did a segment on this, and maybe a revisit. A pointy object certainly helps. Kicking with both feet can do it, though. The side windows are just tempered glass, not the plastic-laminated safety glass.
On the other hand, tapping the EDGE of the glass, such as when trying to unlock the car with a coat hanger, can easily shatter the window. That happened to be and I didn't hit it hard at all.
Re: (Score:2)
And a woman might well have a high pressure device fitted to her shoes that would significantly increase the chances of breaking the glass. I guess some men might as well, but stilletto heels are far more likely on a woman than a man.
Re: (Score:2)
Most places, but this story is from the Pacific North West.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Go to a junkyard and try it out. You'll fail. Source: tried it on a few cars.
Re:Dangerous (Score:5, Insightful)
Door lock doesn't make any difference if the car is in water. You cannot open the door against the water pressure, locked or not.
That's why, if you're in a car that falls into water it's essential that you open the windows before the electrics short out
Re: (Score:3)
Door lock doesn't make any difference if the car is in water. You cannot open the door against the water pressure, locked or not.
That's why, if you're in a car that falls into water it's essential that you open the windows before the electrics short out
You can still open the door once the cabin is filled with water because the pressure has equalized. Granted, that assumes that you can hold your breath long enough to do that. As long as you unlock the door before the electronics short out, you'll be fine. See here for specifics: http://www.ehow.com/how_740940... [ehow.com]
Re:Dangerous (Score:4, Interesting)
Suppose it depends on the water depth. I know I'd rather not wait for the cabin to flood if I were sinking in a lake. You might be pretty deep before you could get the door open and try to swim to the surface.
Re:Dangerous (Score:5, Informative)
Suppose it depends on the water depth. I know I'd rather not wait for the cabin to flood if I were sinking in a lake. You might be pretty deep before you could get the door open and try to swim to the surface.
You more or less have to. The pressure difference means that you wont be able to open the doors. Its the same phenomena that prevents you from opening aeroplane doors mid flight.
I believe that both Top Gear and Mythbusters did a segment on it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Then realize that airplane does open inward, so it the higher pressure inside the plane holding it closed.
A mod point for the AC.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Best tip I ever heard for escaping a locked car - detach the headrest and smash the windows with the prongs (assuming you have detachable headrests...)
Re: (Score:2)
Mythbusters did an episode testing a variety of submerged window myths. Once underwater, the manual crank isn't going to be any good. The pressure differential pushing in on the window is too great.
They also discovered that power windows continued to operate for some time after being submerged. The pressure was still too great until the cabin was almost completely flooded, equalizing the pressure.
Re: (Score:2)
People died while being locked in cars. Two examples are : car fallen in the water, and people sleeping in a car while owner and friend locked it. The owner came back after a long hot weeken, his friend was dead inside. Double lock is a dangerous feature.
Agreed given the number of children & dogs that have died from heat exposure because they were locked in a car on a hot day
Re: (Score:2)
You think double like is dangerous, try double dead lock.
Re: (Score:3)
I'd like a link to that source. I can't imagine a scenario where someone doesn't find the means to break glass and escape vehicle. I get that not everyone carries a safety knife with a glass breaker / seat belt cutter, but...being locked in a hot car and dying as an adult? Unless it has bulletproof windows...you're going to be able to ball your shirt around your elbow and shatter it.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, dangerous! That's why my BMW has no doors or windows or tracking devices. Completely safe.
Re: (Score:3)
People died while being locked in cars.
Two examples are : car fallen in the water, and people sleeping in a car while owner and friend locked it. The owner came back after a long hot weeken, his friend was dead inside.
Double lock is a dangerous feature.
Oh this wouldn't affect me. I am already dead inside.
Re: Dangerous (Score:5, Insightful)
Nope. Slashdotters are generally nervous when it comes to corporate power of this sort. Brand isn't the deciding factor.
Re: Dangerous (Score:5, Insightful)
who are you going to trust. have to trust some.
I'll trust the company that leaves the decisions in my hands, rather than taking them away from me.
Re: Dangerous (Score:4, Insightful)
To add to this, I personally much prefer the Boeing autopilot mentality over the Airbus autopilot mentality (I think they are still generally using this approach). The Boeing approach was the autopilot does its thing until the pilot wants to do something else. The Airbus approach was the autopilot will ignore the pilot if they do something dangerous. This is believed to have led to at least one crash when the autopilot prevented the pilot from taking action (there is however controversy over the actual cause ) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org].
Fine if they want to tell me I'm doing something potentially suicidal and resist my attempts but I'm still not ready to have a computer take full control from me when it thinks it knows better. Maybe I need to just stop and trust the AI, but I've tested certified software going into airplanes, I'm not willing to put my full trust into it.
Re: (Score:3)
Yep, when you let the dogs out, they kill you.
Re: (Score:2)
Some hacker is going to use this app for retaliation when they encounter some BMW driver in traffic behaving like, you know, a BMW driver.
Re: (Score:3)
It's an anti-theft feature marketed as such. The only "privacy" that was violated here was that of the theif. And fuck him.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly... they should not have any access whatsoever to the OWNERS vehicle.
Re: (Score:2)
Good for the guy who got his car back, and good that they put the would be thief away, but still, can't say I much like the idea that our corporate overlords can track your car (and therefore movements) and remotely lock down your vehicle.
And when autonomous vehicles become common, they'll drive the perp to the precinct station.
in TEH FUTAR, felons will walk (Score:2)
Re:Happy ending, but (Score:4, Interesting)
If it came down to allowing someone from remote to lock the vehicle, preventing egress and disable the starter versus just making a claim to the insurance company, I'd rather forgo the remote locking and if the item is stolen, deal with the insurance company and see about a replacement vehicle, for a few reasons:
1: Usually a recovered vehicle is trashed big time, and you never know if sometime down the line you might have a dog search at a checkpoint (anyone travelling on I-10 knows about this) yield something the thieves put there in the way of illegal substances.
2: The vehicle can have a failure and lock someone in. At best, it means smashing a window to get out.
3: Most importantly, right now, it might just be a vehicle maker that can do this from remote... but it is only a matter of time before someone hacks that, and in a 104 degree day, someone decides to stall and double-lock all BMWs on the roads, forcing rescue teams to go vehicle by vehicle to get people out before they expire. Or, even more insidiously, during an evacuation, disable and lock all vehicles, ensuring nobody is able to exit a city before a hurricane strikes. The hacking team that manages to do this to OnStar will be forever immortalized.
And this already has happened on a smaller scale. Here in Austin a few years ago, a disgruntled employee logged into a used car dealership's system and disabled 100+ vehicles that were sold by that dealer, where they stalled in the road and started honking their horns. If a guy with a former employee username/PW can do that, imagine what a state sponsored group can do if/when they feel like that, especially with the mindset of most US companies being that security has no ROI.
tl;dr, keep the remote kill switches. It is only a matter of time before that stuff gets hacked, and perhaps used for ransom ("pay us 2 BTC, or else your car will be disabled and your engine's ECU fried in 12 hours.")
My first thought... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It's OK, he didn't really want it to help. He was just being flippant.
I notice he didn't go for the typical "your" a faggot though - that puts him in the top 0.0225% intelligence bracket for the "opens with you're a faggot" crowd.
Re: (Score:2)
If it's possible to lock someone inside a car — which is a really terrible feature, by the way — then how long before some car's AI flips out and drives off a bridge — into a river — with passengers inside...and locks the doors shut?
And you don't even need to go that far. Imagine if the battery goes flat, or if the door mechanism short-circuits.
In any case, I'm not even sure locking the door was even necessary, it sounds like the thief was sleeping in the car after a night of amphetamines.
Re: (Score:3)
The easy solution would be that the lock requires a current - with no current, hydraulics flip it to unlocked.
Re: (Score:2)
How does something actuate without power?
Remember Michael Hastings? (Score:2)
Oh wait, Hastings was locked inside a Mercedes as it crashed. Obviously no relation to this BMW story.
Then again, I'm a bit surprised that they revealed the capability so publicly. It's not like any dictators or powerful authorities would ever abuse such a capability.
(Don't look at me. I've gone completely paranoid now. I even think Snowden is just a sincere pawn and he was never allowed near any of the really dark stuff.)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, socialist scum. Happens all the time in Cuba, and totally wasn't invented in Germany and practised in the US.
Fascinating how people yell all the time about "socialists" when things that doesn't happen in socialist countries happens in their own "democratic" countries. It's almost like they're talking out of their asses and need to learn a bit about corporatism and fascism. But that would require opening a book or two. Can't have that, it's socialism!
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, it doesn't work that way. The thieves didn't get "locked in". The car was remotely disabled. If they chose to stay inside, that's because they were dumb. There is a safety feature mandated by law in most western countries where there must be a mechanical override available from inside to unlatch any door locks and the trunk lock. The summary is stupid or the article is written by someone without any understanding of how cars really work.
TL;DR: It's patently false.
Here's video footage (Score:3)
See??? (Score:5, Insightful)
This incredibly rare set of circumstances is exactly why we should happily and unquestioningly give our freedoms and privacy away to corporations and to the government!
Re: (Score:2)
This incredibly rare set of circumstances is exactly why we should happily and unquestioningly give our freedoms and privacy away to corporations and to the government!
Not really that rare, this is just a variation on an old police tactic, bait cars. They have been a great success in Germany/Poland to combat gangs of Russian car thieves, and I'm sure in many other places too. I fail to see why this could not be done more often if the in-car systems has a manufacturer maintenance access point and the owner allows it. All you need is a positive signal from the seat detector used by the seat-belt alarm to makes sure your idiot is in the car, if there is a dash/driver cam, ev
Re: (Score:2)
This incredibly rare set of circumstances is exactly why we should happily and unquestioningly give our freedoms and privacy away to corporations and to the government!
Not really that rare, this is just a variation on an old police tactic, bait cars. They have been a great success in Germany/Poland to combat gangs of Russian car thieves, and I'm sure in many other places too.
Great success? Any statistics to back that up? Yes, we've all seen this on TV. Question is, is it actually working as more than a temporary deterrent.
I fail to see why this could not be done more often if the in-car systems has a manufacturer maintenance access point and the owner allows it. All you need is a positive signal from the seat detector used by the seat-belt alarm to makes sure your idiot is in the car, if there is a dash/driver cam, even better. Then you just have to be sure the car isn't moving which is where GPS and speedometer readings come in....My self, I'm not planning to break the law so I don't really care although if my car has have remote access although, being an- computer nerd, I'd obviously want the connection to be encrypted and secure.
Instead of stealing the car, a hacker could simply break into this encrypted "secure" system, override the safety protocols, and apply 100% of the brake force to the vehicles traveling on the freeway en masse...
Ain't technology cool? Gee, I can't wait for autonomous cars to really take off. And thinking the owner will have to "allow it" is one hell of an
Re: (Score:2)
Since even with jeeps unconnect system you had to hack each car separately that would be a pain to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Since even with jeeps unconnect system you had to hack each car separately that would be a pain to do.
Sounds like rather tedious work, also known as the reason scripts were invented.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, make other people pay for it. Just use public transportation or get a bicycle...no fancy polluting air conditioning needed either. > Much like the Internet of Things, there's a lot of bullshit that should not be online.
This is the result of fear of poor implementation. Here's an idea that libertarians won't enjoy: regulate the internet connected devices - require specific security methods be used and then make it a crime for t
Government regulations require broken algorithms (Score:3)
I've worked in government, where regulations forced specific security requirements. Because the regulations were based on some guy's understanding that was slightly outdated and slightly questionable at time they were written, they were completely outdated and foolish by the time we were following them.
As an example, regulations require the use of MD5, though weaknesses were found in MD5 in 1996 and it was more completely broken in 2004-2007. SHA-1, SHA-2, or SHA-3 would be much more secure, but regulatio
Re: (Score:2)
...What we *can* do is harden systems against script kiddies and accidents - be sure that our systems don't allow employees to accidentally set our customer database to be directly accessible via the web, and our web site doesn't crash when John O'Reilly registers because he has an SQL "quote" in his name.
I agree we can do a lot to secure systems, but then we also have to mitigate the risk of insider threat. The more valuable an "inaccessible" resource is, the greater the risk of an insider selling access.
I've been doing information security full time for twenty years and before that I studied law. I don't see any clear way that law can improve information security much. Attempts to do so may well just make things more expensive, and possibly no more secure.
The fact that it may be no more secure after considerable investment is partly the reason companies appear to simply be rolling over, and writing off network breaches and stolen data as the "cost of doing business" rather than actually investing to better Security all-around. Believe me there are days whe
Re: (Score:2)
> Car gets stolen? Fine. That's what I have car insurance for. Yes, make other people pay for it. Just use public transportation or get a bicycle...no fancy polluting air conditioning needed either...
We could do a LOT to eliminate excess traffic, pollution, fuel consumption, and wear and tear on roads and vehicles if corporations simply recognized the fact that we DO have the technology today to support remote work for many positions.
Unfortunately, most of us still deal with the ancient mentality that one must be in an office building to physically demonstrate a justification for employment.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no interconnect between Connected Drive and systems such as the brakes. Theyre entirely separate systems.
Of course, you woudl have known this if you had spent more than 0.5s composing your rant, and tried to do some research first.
And of course BMW is the only manufacturer of automobiles on the planet, who secured the patent for the only auto-networking system that will be made for the next several decades.
You would realize your shortsightedness if you had spent more than 0.5s on the fact that the above statement doesn't even require research regarding hacking risks.
Re: (Score:3)
You're missing the point. The mechanical possibility that the car can lock someone in is a safety hazard. Sure, it's great when it locks a car thief in on purpose, not so great if it locks someone in accidentally on a hot day or if the car has been in an accident (especially if it's on fire).
It's not a theoretical matter, people have died [nbcnews.com] that way.
Re: (Score:2)
Or, if you are in the business of stealing cars, make a jamming device a standard piece of equipment....
Your car, their jail (Score:2)
I call bullshit. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I call bullshit. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:I call bullshit. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
The article is light on details as to how the emergency unlock got overridden
That's because there's no such thing as emergency unlock.
There is the opposite though. A specific feature that prevents you from unlocking a car even if you have access to the lock button / mechanism or whatever, and that has been an anti-theft device designed to stop people from smashing a window and opening a door for a good 20 years now.
Re: (Score:3)
At an airshow, I once sat in a Corvette on display. The door latch will not open the door without battery power, and for some reason the power went out, so I got trapped in the car. An airshow attendant let me out.
Only months later did I learn the emergency latch to open the door was on the floor. There may be an override for safety reasons, but it's not always obvious.
Fun fact: at least one Corvette owner actually died in his car on a hot day since he couldn't figure out how to open the door.
Re: I call bullshit. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, last time I checked it is illegal to sell cars like that in the U.S. Just FYI.
Re: (Score:3)
It stops people smashing a small window and then unlocking the door from the inside to get it.
A whole new opportunity for Ransomware (Score:2)
Hold people hostage, not harddisks!
Of course, it's IoT, so we shouldn't question the benefits.
Re: (Score:2)
This hardly ever happens. What does happen, is emergency workers not being able to open the door because it is locked. You're much more likely to die from your doors being securely locked than you are from them not being locked...
Re: (Score:2)
False. One of the largest dangers in a car accident is being thrown out of the car (in the car you are, after all, surrounded by protecting metal), and leaving the doors unlocked increases that danger. Emergency workers have tools. They don't need the doors to be unlocked to get
How does this work? (Score:2)
My car automatically locks the doors when I drive. It unlocks when I pull the interior door handle. I've had the door card off, and there's a mechanical link from the interior door handle to the lock. So is there a separate mechanism that defeats this mechanical link?
Re: (Score:3)
With my car, once it's been locked with the button on the key fob, after a certain amount of time, it deadlocks the doors - they can not be opened from the inside or outside without being unlocked. The unlock button on the driver's door will no longer function either after the car has been locked from the fob.
This means I could, if I wanted to, lock the car with the windows partially down and after a minute or so the car would be deadlocked - even if someone reached in to open the door, they would be unable
Re: (Score:2)
Thank God! (Score:3)
I'm glad it was a thief with doors. A doorless thief would have escaped.
But I wonder how did they lock his doors remotely?
Oldsmobile invented this (Score:5, Funny)
Their R&D center was located on Chappaquiddick Island in Massachusetts. After a tragic accident as a result of Soviet hacking, Oldsmobile closed the center in 1969.
Escape is easy (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The headrests from the front seats of my car cannot be removed - all part of some fancy anti-whiplash system. This seems to be a fairly common "modern" design. Sure - the technician probably knows of a way to do it...but you ain't doing it in an emergency.
Although difficult - the back ones do come out. Seems to be by design - slides up to the top...then one side becomes very very difficult to pull on.
"Feature" has already killed someone (Score:5, Insightful)
Last week, a burglar pried apart some security bars at my business and squeezed in. He was able to make off with some stolen goods because once inside, he was easily able to open the locked exit door. Fire codes require that all building exit doors accessible to the public be openable from the inside even when locked. These laws were made after repeated fires [wikipedia.org] with huge death tolls [wikipedia.org] exacerbated by locked exit doors [wikipedia.org]. That's what the bar on the door you press when leaving most restaurants and stores does. Even when the door is locked, pushing the bar from the inside will open the door. That way if a fire breaks out, you're not trapped inside because the only person who has the key was the idiot who started the fire and is dead.
Same thing with refrigerators - both the old stand-up units which latched shut, and walk-in refrigerator/freezers used in restaurants. Too many people (especially kids playing) were dying after being trapped inside [wikipedia.org], that laws were passed requiring a mechanism which allows someone inside to open the latch on the outside.
I don't see why cars should be any different. Yes easy egress makes thievery easier. But preventing that is just not worth the potential loss of life. Any car designer who thinks this is a good idea should be locked inside one of their cars on a sunny day until they admit it's a terrible idea. Heck, after dozens of kids dying each year after being locked in the trunk of a car while playing, we finally passed a law [cornell.edu] mandating a release mechanism inside the trunk. And some idiot car designer decides it would be a good idea to make it impossible for someone inside the passenger compartment to exit at will? Shame on BMW for trying to spin this to the press as a "helpful" feature.
Keep a hammer in the car (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I was going to make a joke about this guy being trapped in a convertible with the top down, but being able to get out of mine even if submerged in water is simple.
Release the latches. The water should actually help open the roof. That is assuming I even need to in case the electrical system is dead.
Remind me not to buy or rent BMW (Score:3)
There's a lesson here (Score:2)
Tools to break car windows are plentiful (Score:2)
http://www.dhgate.com/product/... [dhgate.com]|3634601311
So...who owns the car...? (Score:3)
Law works for wealthy people... (Score:2)
Good to see yet another example of the law working out well for those with money.
Something tells me that the police would not have been so determined if it was a hooptie that was stolen...
Re: (Score:2)
"BMW Assist" is basically a knock-off of GM's "OnStar". I wouldn't be too surprised if stories like this are happening all the time with less pricey cars. Anytime there is a stolen car with GPS and a communications link, police are going to make a serious attempt to find the car and grab the thief. Locking the scumbag inside the car is just an added bonus.
Locked or Disabled Car? (Score:2)
Seems obvious but other than being asleep, why not just roll down the windows if they locked the doors? Unless of coarse they disabled the whole car which is even worse/dangerous ability to have remotely.
I know I keep a ball peen hammer in the door of my car in case of a water crash as mentioned by many above. Dad saw a documentary or something and bought it for me. I figure it also might serve for self defense if it ever came to it.
Headline correction (Score:2)
BMW Traps A Car Thief By Remotely Locking His Doors
They're not his doors, though, are they?
Industry Wants Auto theft (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:so what? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't see why this is a story on Slashdot
Then you must not be thinking of the children. Or terrorists. Oh, and don't forget about children and terrorists.
This story sounds like nothing on the surface, right up until you realize that BMW can track their cars remotely and execute remote operations on them (this was just a teaser of their remote capabilities most likely).
From hacking that system to legal "justifications" sans warrants, this is a privacy and security nightmare.
But hey, carry on...nothing to see here according to the ignorant masses who have been trained that way. Simply because most "gadgets" these days are a privacy and security nightmare doesn't dismiss that fact, or the consequences.
I for one was rather baffled over the keyfob left in the car. My 8-year old car would not automatically lock the doors if it sensed the keyfob inside, so I'm assuming the car was left unlocked with the keyfob. Fail all around.
Re: (Score:3)
You're forgetting the child terrorists. And the childish terrorists. And the terrifying children. And the terrorists' children.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I am not expert here, but I think that you have to be awake in order to make a conscious decision to break a window.
Re: (Score:3)
There is always a mechanical override, it's a part of car safety laws in most western countries, U.S. included. Summary is wrong, possibly the article too.