Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   Electric Cars (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/electric-cars/)

-   -   Researchers hack Tesla to permanently unlock features previously behind a paywall (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/electric-cars/269010-researchers-hack-tesla-permanently-unlock-features-previously-behind-paywall.html)

According to media reports, researchers at the Technische Universitat, Berlin, Germany, have found a way to enable all features in a Tesla car, previously locked behind a paywall.

The researchers stated that the hack isn't to exploit or allow remote parties to access the car but only enables owners to access features already present in the car that would otherwise need a subscription. One of the researchers stated that the hack was conducted on their own Tesla models, which unlocked rear heated seats, as they didn't want to pay $300 for them.



The researcher went on to explain how they hacked the car in simple layman's terms. He stated, "It all comes down to changing the voltage at the AMD processing unit of the infotainment system. “If we do it at the right moment, we can trick the CPU into doing something else. It has a hiccup, skips an instruction, and accepts our manipulated code. That’s basically what we do in a nutshell."

Once researchers have access to the vehicle, they can make the changes required. This includes enabling heated seats, improving performance and even unlocking full self-driving tech. However, the hack isn't patchable unless Tesla upgrades the processor in the infotainment system.

Reports state that if such hacks become common, then they could seriously affect a brand's long-term subscription model.

Source: CarScoops

Link to Team-BHP news

This is where the law can come into the picture.

"IF" Tesla can prove this was an act of 'Piracy' then we can take out our popcorns and watch the events unfolding. Gone are the old days of remapping the ECU, tyre swaps, DeCat, Headers, LED lights, bigger HU, woofer, amp, etc etc.

The way the car makers are tightening the screws on their cars & services, it remains to be seen if Law will see foul play in hacking/unlocking a paid feature.

Remember - No car maker ever said pay me $300 to Remap the ECU or $500 for a Header. Those were in the league of "AFTER-market" mods.

But what these 'Researchers' are doing is actually playing with a 'Wantedly Locked - for Pay & Use' feature.

Ps - Researchers? Seriously? Programmers/coders at best!

I am really conflicted on this. On one side, I want to ride with all the bells and whistles the car is equipped with and frowns when someone says how to use the car I bought and paid for. On the other hand, it hinges on the illegal side of the law which may or may not be accurate.

But I guess its inevitable. I play a lot of video games and remember the drama that unfolded when pay to access feature begin to appear in almost all online games all those year ago. Now its a standard so I guess cars will also have subscriptions in near future.

I echo everything you say. But is it fair for premium(ish) products to have disabled/derated features when I have paid for the whole car? I can understand locking features that aren't fully developed yet and later offering as an upgrade - for eg full autonomous when it becomes feasible, safe and legal. But heated seats? Really? What next?

$300 for the AC to go to 16 or be happy with 22?
High beams for the low low price of $15?

I can also understand if the product is sold to me at a discount without any bells and whistles so that entry cost is low. But this is not that.

So, researchers or hackers, I wish them power. Though I hope they only unlock basic features and not safety risks. Manufacturers should not resort to recurring incomes in this manner. I pay for a car, give me a full car.

Don't agree. Tesla can void the warranty at best. As long as the car is owned by the individual, they can do with it as they please. They can change the entire software and add new features. Remember, the hardware for these features has already been billed for by Tesla. In fact, they can actually sue tesla for billing them for a hardware which cannot be used. Lot of legal hassles for Tesla in this case. Courts are anyway inclined to support the individual customer over the rich automobile company.
Only the Government should have an issue in such modifications if they can impact the road worthiness of the vehicle under question.

I don’t think manufacturers can say, what we can do with our cars- which we completely own.

They may refuse to honour warranty at max. Rest of it all is about vehicle’s road worthiness and compliance with Motor Vehicle regulations of the place. As long as the latter are met, we can do whatever we want with our cars.

But, providing services like these for monetary gain may be illegal.

This was a long time coming.

When we buy a car, we buy it in its entirety. What we do with it then is not the manufacturer’s concern. At max, they can deny warranty coverage. But I refuse to accept the premise that they will put the physical hardware and software into my car that I have bought, and then keep it disabled pending subscription. Kudos to the German team who made this possible, and waived a big finger to the corporates taking us for a ride. This entire concept of subscriptions has no place in the automobile industry.

Come to think of it, how is this any different from enabling features via VCDS?

Not too shabby, unless we're comparing it to Ferrari suing their own customersrl:

Tesla in installing Hardware into all their cars which many people might or might not use (subscribe). What an unnecessary waste of hardware/ resources.
This is not like an ECU remap or adding header to an already existing component which is essential to run the car, rather hardware components which are dead weight if not subscribed to.

I think Tesla (and Ola) will have to, like all other car manufacturers, go back to the tried & tested model - do not put the hardware in the first place in the 'lower variant'.

At present, they must be providing the same hardware, to save on manufacturing costs & number of SKUs and locking it by software.

I would be surprised if I saw Tesla actually sue these guys. The European justice system ferociously sides with the consumers, especially when corporations try to drain money from them.

It's a 'TU'. I think the article referred to actual researchers. Not that they were researching Tesla. TUs have a lot of research ongoing in various fields.

Great thing by the guys. If a feature is hidden in my car - I am going to "unlock" it - if the car company wants to charge for features, they should not include it in the (base) model I am purchasing - so they should have a whole set of sub-variants.

The onus is on them to keep the "plus" features in their top models, which in turn fetch them customers who are willing to pay more. And the onus is with me, the consumer, to unlock something - if I know of something "hidden" in plain sight.

Excellent work by these talented researchers. I think we must welcome the move since it enables us to use the hardware that are inherently paid for by us. Its not piracy in any form, and such moves should be encouraged. At best Tesla can void the warranty, like many manufacturers do when we add extra lights or music systems or get the servicing done outside the company service centers, but no way that they can challenge the researchers legally and hope to win.

This debate of "I purchased so my privilege to unlock" is similar to "right to repair" debate .

Corporations somehow want to find a way monetize the asset even after the Sell. Hence the restriction on self repair or compulsion to subscribe for features.

Boils down to corporate greed .. but hey , those MBAs have to justify the salary some how :)