[yasth]

It should be noted that this is a very limited ruling. Only the owner can modify the car, and you can't go to a mechanic or third party to modify it (or inspect it), which will greatly restrict the application.

Also this doesn't apply to Entertainment or Telemetrics portions. So your car could be straight up spying on you, or your manufacturer can leave unpatched security holes in your "Entertainment" system (which has already been used ( http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/syst...) to remotely hack your car), and there is nothing you can legally do. You can't even deeply look into the system to find such vulnerabilities.

I mean a win is a win, but this isn't as big as one would hope.

[randyrand]

Fortunateyly the software in your 2015 honda civic is nearly or completely identical to all other 2015 honda civics, though.

I agree that its unfortunate, but being able to inspect the software in your car is nearly as good as being able to inspect other's or have other's inspect yours if you have the same make and year.

[yasth]

Well there is probably a pretty big difference between the normal civic, the hybrid civic, and the natural gas civic, but I don't think there will be lots of per car model/line differences, just that the inability to contract out things means that modification is limited to technical minded people (and no, artful dodges like "The mechanic will set it up, and the owner can push the button" are unlikely to fly).

Also it throws hassles at researchers, some cars have a lot of different combinations of things that might change the ECU software from engine choices to different model lines (Sport models often have different tunings) to even the type of gearbox (Manuals have different tuning than automatics which are different than CVTs, and advanced CVTs actually communicate with the ECU in complex ways that are only activated on the higher trims). No one is going to actually own 8 different Honda Accords just to legally work on all the firmwares. While I have no doubt that a lot of shortcutting will occur (i.e. people will dump the firmware and post it, and if and only if an issue is found will researchers bother to become nominal "owner" of a particular model) it adds a hassle, and a tinge of illegality which is completely unwarranted.

[robryk]

> and no, artful dodges like "The mechanic will set it up, and the owner can push the button" are unlikely to fly

What about selling/renting devices that the owner connects in some obvious way and pushes a button?

[bcook]

ECU tweakers are already very popular with diesel vehicles. Something like that seems legal even under these restrictions.

Buy/rent a device to mod your own vehicle.

[StavrosK]

Huh, I've never seen those before, and I own a diesel car. Are they worth it? What do the tweakers do that the entire Mercedes crew couldn't?

[jnbiche]

> What do the tweakers do that the entire Mercedes crew couldn't?

Openly flout emissions standards.

[paulmlewis]

I'm sure there's some irony in that sentiment ;-) Aside from the VW thing I think pretty much all diesels are above emissions standards in open road testing.

[ams6110]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_Coal

Popular among a subset of diesel pickup truck owners.

[StavrosK]

Interesting, thanks.

[selimthegrim]

"Malone" is a popular tune brand

[gknoy]

I wonder if you could sell your car to the inspector, let them inspect it, and then buy it back.

[rnovak]

Maybe a "Mechanic's Lien" could work for that[1]?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanic%27s_lien

[jakeogh]

It would be an important case. As you note it's on the same bus and meaningless to "be able" to inspect the car control system without looking at it.

The solution is for people to vote with their buys.