this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2023
389 points (98.7% liked)

Privacy

31872 readers
424 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] PeachMan@lemmy.world 78 points 1 year ago (11 children)

This makes perfect sense to me. If you plug your phone in to your car and give it permission to access all your shit, then it will access all your shit, and store it locally so that it doesn't have to re-download all your shit every time. If you don't want your car to do that, then don't plug in your phone and give it permission to do that.

Having said that, it is terrifying how much of our personal data modern cars collect. We should be fighting that, but this specific case was not the way to do that.

[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world 72 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The article specifically mentions this which implies that it's stored on the car.

Berla’s software makes it impossible for vehicle owners to access their communications and call logs but does provide law enforcement with access

But it's immediately followed up with

Many car manufacturers are selling car owners’ data to advertisers as a revenue boosting tactic

Pretty much all new cars being sold today, most cars in the last 5 years, and a large percentage of cars sold in the last 10 all have some sort of cellular modem that reports back to home base with all sorts of info, then they turn around and sell it. GM has been doing this for 20+ years at this point with on star which is included in almost every car they've made.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] thefartographer@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

I disagree. I want every interaction to be processed individually and iteratively. I look forward to my stereo turning into a BOOM box.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 72 points 1 year ago

Oh nice, so people are spending $30,000 min on any new car AND it will record and pass on everything you do in it? Oh and depending on the car manufacturer you may have to pay a subscription for remote entry and heated seats. Its almost as if you are paying for something that you don't control, don't own and now works directly to steal information from you. Cool. Cool.

[–] logi@lemmy.world 50 points 1 year ago

It sounds like someone needs to bring a similar suit in the EU and point to the GDPR. Where is the agreement to specific processing, the chance to opt out of the data collection, etc.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 47 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Fucking why? WHY IS IT OKAY TO SPY AND SNOOP?

[–] Plum@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 year ago

Wouldn't it be cool if legislatures made decisions based on the constitution and ethics and weren't completely driven by corporate profits?

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because a billion people clicked "I Accept" over the past 20 years.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

What they really clicked is "this is bullshit and I don't have time to read all of this, just to use something I paid for". If companies were required by law to distill their policies into plain English and short summaries then a lot fewer people would have clicked accept. But those ToS started out as nothing more than overly long liability waivers, and over the years the corporations started sneaking more and more exploitative language into them.

[–] FuryMaker@lemmy.world 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

By design.

I have issue if they:

  • Collect unnecessary data if just used to read out messages, relay calls, or navigate

  • Store it in their cloud service (i.e. not local on the car)

  • Share it or sell it with other third parties

  • Cannot delete the data collected

Clearly states in article owners can't delete data collected

[–] Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They will say they won't but there's nothing stopping them. Isn't that the actual problem?

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 year ago

Yes, the problem is that there are no laws to stop them and now it was just officially made legal.

[–] Imprint9816@lemmy.dbzer0.com 29 points 1 year ago

Wild that your own text messages could be stored locally on your car but you have no access to the information

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 27 points 1 year ago

I guess someone should've presented the following situations to the court: some CEO of a small-medium company driving his Toyota sends a very important message regarding work. Toyota also gets to read it and is immediately aware of how that'll affect stock price. Time to gamble on the market, baby!

Situation 2: some researcher driving his Honda sends several files regarding a secret new product to his boss. Honda also gets to access the files and the content of the message. "Oh look, Honda released my product before me!"

Situation 3: After using the snooped information for self profit, the automaker sells it to 3rd parties for further profit.

[–] clif@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think I'll continue sticking to "dumb" cars.. at least as much as they're available.

The "smart" fad can go fuck a duck.

[–] spauldo@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Or just don't connect your phone to it. That's what I do. I've never touched the "smart" screen in my car except to adjust the air conditioner.

[–] clif@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Ugh, I also have a special hatred for touch screen anything in cars.

Give me fucking knobs and buttons. I don't want to have to stop looking at the road while I drive a 1000kg death machine because I can't adjust the air con without looking.

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes and you paid for that "smart" screen, and anyway does this stop the car from sending anything? No?

You sure showed them, by not using the stuff you paid them for. Yeap.

[–] spauldo@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I paid for a car that I could drive halfway across the country in and be comfortable,not spend a fortune on fuel, and not worry too much about it stranding me on the side of the road. The smart screen just happened to come with it. So it seems to have worked out fine for me.

Are you naturally an asshole or are you making a special effort here?

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

Yes, clearly I am being an asshole for not defending the automakers.

[–] bestusername@aussie.zone 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Probably a stupid question...

What about CarPlay and Android Auto? Is that being intercepted by the car manufacturer?

My basic understanding is Android Auto is pretty much an external monitor for your phone.

Edit: speeling irrers

[–] AttackPanda@programming.dev 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

You got me curious as well so I googled it and it looks like CarPlay just uses the screen as a monitor with no messages or anything downloaded:

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/252600482

Now I wonder what kind of system these vehicles have that downloads text messages. Is that a function of the Bluetooth connectivity or is it a vendor application?

[–] FarFarAway@startrek.website 4 points 1 year ago

I connected Bluetooth to my car, and first thing it asked was if I wanted to allow access to my texts, call logs, and contacts.

I admit, i think I did it once. It acted like it didn't work. Idk. It periodically still asks though. It doesn't do this if I connect my phone to the car through Andriod Auto.

[–] PigsInClover@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I believe there’s also some dashboard touchscreens you can separately buy that use CarPlay.

So for now, using one of those instead of the system built into the car is a potential way to circumvent automakers that are keeping your data/texts.

At least if you want the benefits of using a dashboard touchscreen that your phone connects to.

[–] oranwolf@pawb.social 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm curious about this as well. I know my car can access phone records and contacts for Bluetooth calling outside of AA, but what about everything else? I also thought it was just an external monitor for all of my other apps.

[–] bestusername@aussie.zone 3 points 1 year ago

Definitely, forgot about that, calls do seem to go via the cars factory Bluetooth system. I can unplug my phone mid call and it jumps to the cars own call screen.

So phone number, duration and possibly caller/contact name would be known by the factory headunit and any other information Bluetooth shares with the connect device.

[–] hcbxzz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I don't think the car manufacturer is getting that data, but iirc the part of Android Auto that runs on the head unit does collect data when disconnected, then send it to Google when the phone is connected.

[–] imgprojts@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I got my ballot this Monday and half of the spots to be voted on had only one candidate.... maybe remove that shit from the ballot and add things like..."would you like Toyota to know where you are when you send emails about your period?" That would be useful.

[–] zagaberoo@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You'd think, but that's essentially the California proposition system, and it has significant downsides.

[–] AnonymousLemming@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

Care to elaborate on the significant downsides?

[–] imgprojts@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

I'm in Washington State so I guess it is everywhere.

[–] SVcross@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Fuck that shit.

[–] czardestructo@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

For what it's worth my 2015 Toyota will allow me to connect over Bluetooth but in android I wouldn't give it permissions to my text message, just audio. It works fine except for the fact that every damn time I turn the car on it asks again for text message access and I have to click no on the infotainment screen.

[–] MeetInPotatoes@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 year ago

Sick fucks.

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 year ago

First step of buying a car, find all antennas and replace them with dummy loads

[–] TCB13@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Great 🤦‍♂️

[–] imgprojts@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

Double you fucking tee eff? Holybonkerslaw Batman! Now what? Can Motorola take pictures of me while I take a shower watching porn?...err, sending emails?

[–] CouncilOfFriends@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Don't want to sound like a corporate shill, but this sounds necessary for handsfree functions. To read an incoming text read aloud, there would have to be a copy stored. If one was paranoid, they could just avoid pairing their phone.

[–] Kindness@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

Washington Privacy Act (WPA).

Plaintiffs’ operative complaint alleged that their vehicles’ infotainment systems download and permanently store all text messages and call logs from Plaintiffs’ cellphones without their consent.

[...]

The district court properly dismissed Plaintiffs’ claim for failure to satisfy the WPA’s statutory injury requirement. See WASH. REV. CODE § 9.73.060. To succeed at the pleading stage of a WPA claim, a plaintiff must allege an injury to “his or her business, his or her person, or his or her reputation.” Id. Contrary to Plaintiffs’ argument, a bare violation of the WPA is insufficient to satisfy the statutory injury requirement.

load more comments
view more: next ›