Do You Want Your Scout To Have A Hands-Free Driving System?

[eddiet1212]

Do You Want Your Scout To Have A Hands-Free Driving System?

I do NOT want my Scout to drive itself.

Part of owning a hands-on vehicle would be the satisfaction of tactile power over your destiny while enjoying the ride.

If I wanted a robo-car then I could buy a future Rivian.

Reuters
Rivian to launch hands-free driving system in 2025, 'eyes-off' in 2026

Rivian to launch hands-free driving system in 2025, 'eyes-off' in 2026, CEO says

(Reuters) -Electric-vehicle maker Rivian plans to launch its advanced hands-free driver assistance systems in 2025 and its "eyes-off" systems in 2026, CEO RJ Scaringe said on Thursday. An advanced driver assistance system that enables drivers to take their hands off the wheel and eyes off the...

ca.finance.yahoo.com

 

[6-ScoutFamily]

I go back and forth on this. If I was on the highway someplace where people don’t drive like maniacs and the roads are long, straight, and very boring, then yes: I would absolutely want hands-free-eyes-off driving to take over for a bit. When I’m unfamiliar with a place, I get pretty nervous. It might be nice to have that automation, provided it’s reliable. If I end up rear-ending someone, well, then there’s a new horrific flashback for my stash?

And herein lies the fundamental problem with hands-free driving. It assumes everyone else on the road is going to behave properly 100% of the time. That’s not going to happen! You can make the argument that it won’t be an issue once all vehicles have it along with mandatory usage, but then there is no need for any individuality. Everyone rides in cube.

 

[J Alynn]

There are lot of fear mongers here that would rather not have some features at all than choose not to use them.

Hey now-I watched Terminator and I-robot. I know how these things evolve

 

[6-ScoutFamily]

You can drive across my state from sunrise to sunset and still be a within our borders.

I will take all the driving assistance I can get!

I’ve done plenty of 16 hour day road trips with no breaks and I’m ready to relax and enjoy the journey more without having to be so focused on driving.

Even a 20 minute break on a straight stretch of interstate is refreshing like a bidet for the brain.

EW!

 

[6-ScoutFamily]

If it’s a choice between self-driving and a Super Double Mega-Wumpus battery—I choose the battery.

 

[bsddrake]

There are lot of fear mongers here that would rather not have some features at all than choose not to use them.

counterpoint: I have taken over vehicles as a demo for work (in a controlled environment). This isn't speculation, it can be done, and in the wrong hands it can be a pretty big problem. I just want to be double sure that I can offline a feature, not in software, but at the voltage level.

 

[bsddrake]

Wait. What happened now?
Suddenly "the robots are taking over our trucks"?
Fear not people, that is not what LII+ is or what Scout has planned!

The truck is already a robot, lol.

 

[Chavannigans]

Hey now-I watched Terminator and I-robot. I know how these things evolve

Think positive! I would finally have an excuse for talking to my toaster and the computers could argue for us while we wait for the Travelall.

 

[bsddrake]

I'm not sure if they will plan on a physical switch or not but I assume they will have easy ways to disable it. Even on my Telsa which is known for FSD, I can can toggle to turn Autopilot on/off, and even if I have it turned on I still have to double press the stalk to actually activate it. I can also toggle the lane departure warnings etc. as well. If it was a physical switch I'm sure it would still operate the same as if it were on the screen as it will be software related.

I meant at the voltage level. I should have worded whatever I said better. I would strongly prefer being able to physically disable any hands free diving higher than LII.

 

[Chavannigans]

counterpoint: I have taken over vehicles as a demo for work (in a controlled environment). This isn't speculation, it can be done, and in the wrong hands it can be a pretty big problem. I just want to be double sure that I can offline a feature, not in software, but at the voltage level.

Just use a faraday cage and reassure the Scout that it’s not in jail

We are honestly pretty screwed if someone can hack the in real time using the NIC card. Even if you don’t opt for the required camera system hardware for driver assist technology, it could still be remotely controlled if someone had full access to the vehicles operating system.

The only guaranteed way to have total control over a vehicle is to have a traditional hydraulic rack and pinion and a mechanical throttle/linkage. Most modern cars are transitioning to electronic steering racks that can be controlled by the vehicles on board computer system.

You may be able to get away with disabling/disconnecting the cellular and WAP antennas if they are accessible without voiding your warranty. Not sure if I would be willing to risk it since it could break other functions like Navigation and emergency assistance features.

The CANBUS system itself could be vulnerable to hacking as well. Several hacking teams have taken full control of vehicles by removing a headlight and plugging a computer into the light socket before running their code.

Someone could theoretically remove your taillight and put a device inline with your tail light harnesses to later activate and control the throttle and steering system.

The likelyhood of someone hacking my car is not zero, but it’s close enough for me not to worry about it.

 

[cyure]

I meant at the voltage level. I should have worded whatever I said better. I would strongly prefer being able to physically disable any hands free diving higher than LII.

I don’t want to pay for any hand free driving higher than LII+

 

[J Alynn]

Think positive! I would finally have an excuse for talking to my toaster and the computers could argue for us while we wait for the Travelall.

I think you misspelled ‘spirited debate’

 

[R1TVT]

And herein lies the fundamental problem with hands-free driving. It assumes everyone else on the road is going to behave properly 100% of the time. That’s not going to happen! You can make the argument that it won’t be an issue once all vehicles have it along with mandatory usage, but then there is no need for any individuality. Everyone rides in cube.

There is a lot of misinformation on this subject. Hands-Free driving was not developed with a 100% assumption that everyone else on the road is behaving properly. This is not how these systems operate. They are taking in real-time feedback from things like road markings, speed over ground, GPS, sensors, cameras, LIDAR etc. One good example is when you encounter a human or a cyclist in the shoulder. Systems will detect movement, shapes, basically anything unexpected in a decision matrix (and even show you what is around you as you drive, in some cases). Hands-free, LII+ or FSA is def not a binary thing with discrete dependencies about other vehicles and drivers.

Is it 100% perfect 100% of the time? No, but that is why Scout is implementing LII+ and not FSA at this time - you can't just engage and fall asleep in your truck and hope it drives you to your next destination. This is a good thing.

Also, and in terms of costs, many features of LII+ rely on sensors and cameras that are being used for safety purposes, collision alerts, backing into a space, viewing obstacles while off-roading etc.

Honestly, LII+ is becoming a table stakes feature for any truck of this caliber. Scout is smart to implement this - particularly with the ability to leverage work that has already been done by Rivian and with the implementation of zonal architecture. It will help them sell more trucks, which is something everybody can get behind (and increase re-sale values). Not to mention, you can simply chose not to use it.

 

[Chavannigans]

There is a lot of misinformation on this subject. Hands-Free driving was not developed with a 100% assumption that everyone else on the road is behaving properly. This is not how these systems operate. They are taking in real-time feedback from things like road markings, speed over ground, GPS, sensors, cameras, LIDAR etc. One good example is when you encounter a human or a cyclist in the shoulder. Systems will detect movement, shapes, basically anything unexpected in a decision matrix (and even show you what is around you as you drive, in some cases). Hands-free, LII+ or FSA is def not a binary thing with discrete dependencies about other vehicles and drivers.

Is it 100% perfect 100% of the time? No, but that is why Scout is implementing LII+ and not FSA at this time - you can't just engage and fall asleep in your truck and hope it drives you to your next destination. This is a good thing.

Also, and in terms of costs, many features of LII+ rely on sensors and cameras that are being used for safety purposes, collision alerts, backing into a space, viewing obstacles while off-roading etc.

Honestly, LII+ is becoming a table stakes feature for any truck of this caliber. Scout is smart to implement this - particularly with the ability to leverage work that has already been done by Rivian and with the implementation of zonal architecture. It will help them sell more trucks, which is something everybody can get behind (and increase re-sale values). Not to mention, you can simply chose not to use it.

Just remember, there were people that raised hell when wearing a seatbelt became required by law.

Change just freaks a lot of people out, even if it’s to their benefit.

 

[bsddrake]

I don’t want to pay for any hand free driving higher than LII+

If the hardware is there, then it would be in the vehicle either way. It would still just be a software configuration that decides who controls the vehicle.

 

[bsddrake]

Just use a faraday cage and reassure the Scout that it’s not in jail

We are honestly pretty screwed if someone can hack the in real time using the NIC card. Even if you don’t opt for the required camera system hardware for driver assist technology, it could still be remotely controlled if someone had full access to the vehicles operating system.

The only guaranteed way to have total control over a vehicle is to have a traditional hydraulic rack and pinion and a mechanical throttle/linkage. Most modern cars are transitioning to electronic steering racks that can be controlled by the vehicles on board computer system.

You may be able to get away with disabling/disconnecting the cellular and WAP antennas if they are accessible without voiding your warranty. Not sure if I would be willing to risk it since it could break other functions like Navigation and emergency assistance features.

The CANBUS system itself could be vulnerable to hacking as well. Several hacking teams have taken full control of vehicles by removing a headlight and plugging a computer into the light socket before running their code.

Someone could theoretically remove your taillight and put a device inline with your tail light harnesses to later activate and control the throttle and steering system.

The likelyhood of someone hacking my car is not zero, but it’s close enough for me not to worry about it.

I do agree with some of what you are saying, but let me give some context on where the concerns come from. I am only talking about this from the perspective of handsfree driving, if someone is doing something as simple as stealing or burglarizing a vehicle then these apply as well, but are waaaay easier:

The highest impact event is just a manufacturer sending out an unwanted command (accidentally or maliciously). This doesn't necessarily mean that the manufacturer would know about or authorize the command, just that it is given over the official infrastructure. (This can be done)

Next, attacking the app or account of a specific user (including batching multiple accounts). This is similar to the first, but would more likely be done through a 3rd party that found an exploit (This can be done more cheaply)

After those there are OTA attacks without using built in infrastructure. This sidesteps a lot of the functionality and safety limits. This is doable, but I've only seen it "crash" a vehicle. As more functions are done locally on the vehicle, this could become more of a concern. (This can currently be done to cause damage to the vehicle, bystanders or occupants)

Local attacks come in two main varieties:
1) Using the manufacturer's LRU's/controllers to pull off the attacks. This includes tricking them with fraudulent data, and/or actually hacking parts of the OS/software. This is step 1 in the OTA attack listed above, so it has to be more common than that specific attack, but wouldn't be as widespread (This can be done, but needs physical access to the vehicle)
2) Taking over functions that the vehicle already has LRU's/controllers doing. This one is like the CANbus trick that you mentioned. This is by far the easiest one to get started with, but the hardest to get specific control of a vehicle when it comes to handsfree driving. (this is basically a "hello world" attack)

I can't tell you what to be concerned about, but I can tell you that being able to physically disable handsfree driving when it isn't actively being used is the right thing to do. If scout doesn't do this from the factory, I have enough concerns that I would take mine apart do it myself. I would also not publicly provide a kit or a how-to, because in my experience, it is legally not worth the trouble.