| Meta: Earlier in the scandal, I recall reading that the engine management software is from Bosch. I should read further, looking for confirmation of this. If that is the case, then this is an example of the maxim: When you provide a feature, someone will use it to their own ends -- meaning, "misuse" it. Another example to wave in front of all those politicians and people advocating for encryption "back doors". If you put the feature in there, people will use it any way that suits them. Including and especially ways that you did not intend nor want. If it wasn't Bosch, perhaps there was nonetheless some "legitimate" argument within VW for adding this functionality. Enough to get the software folks -- particularly those not making big bucks off of the deal -- to implement this. But an observant engineer might nonetheless ask themself, 'what might hypothetically be done with this?' And the engineer with a little more real world experience ("the cynic" ;-) might assume that someone will do it, sooner or later. That was part of my reputation, for a while: Thinking of what was possible, and assuming -- or insisting -- it needed to be addressed. A year or two later, having done so would prove to have been of benefit. It would sometimes piss Management off, in the short term. But eventually, they came around. Anyway, looking from the outside or the inside: If it's there and can be used "that way", someone's going to get around to doing so. |
However, this was later rejected by Bosch who claim that writing additional code is required by the car manufacturer to get the emissions test detection feature [2].
[1] http://blog.caranddriver.com/report-bosch-warned-vw-about-di... [2] http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/07/volkswagen-emissio...