Court rules automakers can record and intercept owner text messages
therecord.media
external-link
A Seattle-based appellate judge ruled that the practice does not meet the threshold for an illegal privacy violation under state law, handing a big win to automakers Honda, Toyota, Volkswagen and General Motors.
@Rearsays@lemmy.ml
link
fedilink
English
1410M

I mean ok but the fact that your car is spying on you has to break a thousand big tech nda’s

Yet another item on my list of why I’ll never buy a modern car.

d00phy
link
fedilink
English
1010M

Obvious next question: how’s the privacy policy on 3rd party stereo makers like Pioneer, Kenwood, Alpine, Jensen, etc.?

themeatbridge
link
fedilink
English
310M

Why risk it? Build your own with a raspberry pi and a touchscreen.

brianorca
link
fedilink
English
3
edit-2
10M

Should be better since they usually don’t have an uplink capability. But be real careful of any model that has Internet for any reason.

@cybersandwich@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
42
edit-2
10M

Isn’t this just a basic legal concept?

“In order to claim damages, there must be a breach in the duty of the defendant towards the plaintiff, which results in an injury”

Basically the judge is saying the plaintiff didn’t establish the basic foundation of a tort case. He’s not saying this isn’t wrong, he’s saying they didn’t present the case in a way that proves it.

It’s not enough to say “you shouldn’t be doing this”–even if that’s true.

@Jabaski@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
210M

Take a page from the conservative/GOP playbook and just find an activity judge who will wholesale accept your fabricated claim and provide a favorite judgement.

@Maggoty@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
110M

Sure except under this logic there’s no injury to someone peering through your windows. After all they didn’t do anything else…

plz1
link
fedilink
English
1310M

One of these companies needs to be beached to prove damages, I guess.

@Crackhappy@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
610M

Well I am still so happy that I decided specifically to get a newish car that doesn’t have a touchscreen or any of this nonsense.

Someology
link
fedilink
English
310M

What model did you buy? It is rare to see one these days that doesn’t have all this nonsense.

@Crackhappy@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
210M

2015 Buick encore. I did remove the fuse for the OnStar satellite nonsense though.

Someology
link
fedilink
English
310M

Thank you for sharing the information!

@NateNate60@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
2110M

Disappointing result but this seems like something for the legislature to fix. Courts aren’t always the solution, sometimes you have to just fix the damn law.

krolden
link
fedilink
English
210M

This is supposed to be covered by the fourthamendment but that’s been meaningless for over 20 years now

@NateNate60@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
1210M

Amendment 4 does not apply to the practices of a private company. That’s what privacy legislation is intended to protect against. Amendment 4 only applies to spying done by the State.

krolden
link
fedilink
English
110M

The state is just spying via a proxy.

@NateNate60@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
-110M

Do you actually literally believe that (in the context of law), or is that just rhetorical speech?

@okamiueru@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
210M

If the purpose of collecting the data by private companies is to somehow make money, do you think that sharing this data, or conclusions based on this data, somehow manages to exclude access of governmental agencies? I’ve never gotten the impression that CIA/NSA would ever willingly play nice.

@NateNate60@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
-1
edit-2
10M

This is getting off-track again—

Government agencies paying private companies for your information, or even just asking for it in exchange for something or nothing is legal. That’s because nothing was searched unreasonably (because consent was given by the controller of the information) nor was anything seized against the controller’s will.

You are not in the picture. The information might be about you but you don’t control the information, the car company does. From a legal standpoint, you are irrelevant for the purposes of Amendment 4 protection.

Amendment 4 protects the controller of the information from Government seizure but does not protect the subject of that information. Privacy laws are what are intended to protect the subjects of information. There is some overlap of course. For example, your computer has lots of information about you and what you did in the past. You would be both the subject of the information and the controller (since it’s stored on your computer).

Please remember, I am describing what the law is, not what it should be.

flipht
link
fedilink
310M

It’s literally what’s happening.

Texas used the same concept to empower private people to sue abortion providers and receivers under civil law since they couldn’t do it criminally.

The country as a whole has done it for a long time with cellphone data, the five eyes alliance, etc.

They have access to information they’re barred from getting directly themselves, and they get it from private companies. Spying by proxy.

krolden
link
fedilink
English
010M

What

@NateNate60@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
010M

If you want to call it that, you can. The State spying by proxy (paying or asking companies for info) is legal and not prohibited by Amendment 4. Amendment 4 does not protect the subjects of information. It protects the controllers of information (which would be the car company).

Encrypt-Keeper
link
fedilink
English
210M

Just like with the first amendment, it doesn’t apply to private companies. The point is to prevent the government from passing tyrannical laws, it was never meant to district the activity of private citizens.

@douglasg14b@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
210M

Very true.

Unfortunately corporations are becoming the government, without checks or constraints.

krolden
link
fedilink
English
110M

deleted by creator

So ask the judge why car companies want to track judges?

auto manufacturers had violated Washington state’s privacy laws by using vehicles’ on-board infotainment systems to record and intercept customers’ private text messages and mobile phone call logs.

But the appellate judge ruled Tuesday that the interception and recording of mobile phone activity did not meet the Washington Privacy Act’s standard

Privacy is a fundamental human right.

Just not in Usa, as it seems. Here it is indeed the law that needs to be fixed.

https://www.humanrightscareers.com/issues/is-privacy-a-human-right/

The Real King Gordon
link
fedilink
English
1510M

This is why I keep my 2006 toyota in tip top shape. I will drive that car as long as I possibly can.

krolden
link
fedilink
English
510M

Really considering taking out a loan just to fix an old car instead of buying new.

MamboGator
link
fedilink
English
510M

I’ve been having dreams lately where I’m driving around in my old 1987 thunderbird that I got in 2003 when I was in high school. It wasn’t a great car and I was hoping my next vehicle could be electric, but maybe that’s a sign I need to be going backwards.

@notannpc@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
1510M

I wonder how long until we get to jailbreak our cars just so those cock suckers can’t spy on us.

@Maggoty@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
210M

Technically you already can. I just hope you have extensive programming knowledge because you’re going to have to take an axe to the existing code.

@CADmonkey@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
310M

May be able to find and remove whatever it’s using as a cellphone antenna.

@Maggoty@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
010M

Sorry your car just stopped working for “safety” reasons.

@CADmonkey@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
110M

If that were the case, there would be traffic jams in tunnels across the country due to disabled cars.

@Maggoty@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
110M

Nah, it just detects the presence of the hardware.

@CADmonkey@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
110M

But not the faraday cage around the telematics unit.

@Maggoty@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
110M

Yeah I’m not saying it’s impossible. Just not easy.

@kryostar@lemmy.world
link
fedilink
English
510M

Well… fuck. More reason to not buy newer cars. At least you Americans are lucky. You can drive a dinosaur if it met with regulations. You technically don’t have to buy new cars… ever.

Create a post

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don’t control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we’re here to support and learn from one another. Insults won’t be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it’s not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don’t duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

  • 1 user online
  • 31 users / day
  • 80 users / week
  • 216 users / month
  • 845 users / 6 months
  • 1 subscriber
  • 1.42K Posts
  • 8.13K Comments
  • Modlog