[genericuser]

So why were the researchers willing to publish a redacted version now, but were not willing to publish the redacted version 3 years ago when they were researching the issue?

I am actually curious because this is the only part of this whole thing that does not make sense to me. Even if I disagree with Volkswagon's decision to not notify existing owners that there was a vulnerability known or eventually provide them with a fix, the decision at least makes sense because it probably was deemed more profitable for VW.

"The scientists wanted to publish their paper at the well-respected Usenix Security Symposium in Washington DC in August, but the court has imposed an interim injunction. Volkswagen had asked the scientists to publish a redacted version of their paper – Dismantling Megamos Crypto: Wirelessly Lockpicking a Vehicle Immobiliser – without the codes, but they declined."

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/jul/26/scientist-...

[vilhelm_s]

Is it the same redacted version? Maybe Volkswagen asked more more extensive redactions back then, and they now reached a compromise?

[genericuser]

It sounds like the same thing was redacted from this version that they asked be redacted from that version as this one doesn't have the specific codes necessary to make it work.