[s_q_b]

I fully agree. The crux of my argument is that self-driving cars aren't inherently any more hackable or trackable than existing vehicles with existing available data connections through cell, emergency communications, OTA updates, or usb if local.

One could, in theory, use the fly-by-wire steering, traction control, or ABS systems to simulate a pretty convincing crash. It would be fairly straightforward electronically through the onboard processors in existing cars, and would be practically untraceable.

[pbreit]

Yes, I would say a car that can do anything from centrally provided instructions is inherently more hackable than a car that is disconnected from everything and can't do much more than keep its speed on the highway.

[s_q_b]

That's beside the point. The question of centrally distributed updates is orthogonal to that of self-driving cars.

[pbreit]

I'd be surprised if any of the self-driving cars are not "online".

[s_q_b]

That's fair. But what I see is that the car fleet will head towards OTA no matter what we do.

Forgive me for my cynicism. If you've ever worked with embedded systems... Well the state of consumer security is so bad I'd be shocked if someone hadn't already been killed in this way.

The Bluetooth alone is a nightmarish enough vector already. And local installation is very possible.

After all, all cars do need servicing...