In Letter To 20 Automakers, Senator Demands Answers On Cybersecurity

chicksdaddy writes "Cyber attacks on 'connected vehicles' are still in the proof of concept stage. But those proofs of concept are close enough to the real thing to prompt an inquiry from U.S. Senator Ed Markey, who sent a letter to 20 major auto manufacturers (PDF) asking for information about consumer privacy protections and safeguards against cyber attacks in their vehicles. Markey's letter, dated December 2, cites recent reports of 'commands...sent through a car's computer system that could cause it to suddenly accelerate, turn or kill the breaks,' and references research conducted by Charlie Miller and Chris Valasek (PDF) on the Toyota Prius and Ford Escape. 'Today's cars and light trucks contain more than 50 separate electronic control units (ECUs), connected through a controller area network (CAN) ... Vehicle functionality, safety and privacy all depend on the functions of these small computers, as well as their ability to communicate with one another,' Markey wrote. Among the questions Markey wants answers to: What percentage of cars sold in model years 2013 and 2014 do not have any wireless entry points? What are automakers' methods for testing for vulnerabilities in technologies it deploys — including third pressure technologies? Markey asks specifically about tire pressure monitors, bluetooth and other wireless technologies and GPS (like Onstar). What third party penetration testing is conducted on vehicles (and any results)? What intrusion detection features exist for critical components like controller area network (CAN) buses on connected vehicles?"

Stupid Senator

[Ultra64]

If you don't know the difference between "breaks" and "brakes", will you really understand the answers to your questions?

Re:Stupid Senator

[hey!]

Ah yes, the culture of "zing". It's much more important to catch a politician (or more likely, one of his staff) in a typo than to pay attention to the substance of what he's written.

If either the pol or one of his staff is semi-literate, why should anyone take him seriously?

Well, that's begging the question. We don't *know* that Senator Markey or anyone on his staff are illiterate; we only know that they aren't as careful with proofreading as they could be.

That said, I'll attempt to answer your question: because he (or his staff) is raising a serious, important point. That's not enough for you to listen to him? It's not enough that he served thirty years on the House Committee on Communications and Technology either? He (and his staff and the secretarial pool in his office) have to be *infallible* in matters of proofreading before you'll listen?