I just want to say that I'm so happy that people are taking notice of privacy concerns in cars

I'm basically in the position that I'm driving a car from 1999, and when it finally dies, I'll either be resigned to riding the bus or finding another aged used car without all this absolute bullshit in it.

Maybe it really is time for the Free Open Source Vehicle.

Get ready for the Pine Car
- I mean.... I'd buy one. Already got a Pinecil.
You don't need a very old car, just one that is old enough the cellular network doesn't work any more.
Some vehicles were made for 3g, and can't go to 4g for example.
- Just put a faraday cage around the antenna.
- My VW has carplay / android auto but the built-in Sim no longer functions (2g).
  From 2011 has most modern luxuries
Maybe it really is time for the Free Open Source Vehicle.
Sure, but what it is for certain time for is making this sort of spying and tracking illegal. If I as a private citizen tracked someone this much, it would be considered stalking, which is a criminal offense.
- Oh my god, no. No, no, no.
  Just because they aren't making those features available to you doesn't mean they aren't still tracking all that stuff.
- I mean sort of. What is "base" has also changed.
  Try finding an EV that doesn't have automatic windows but has old school manual rollup/rolldown windows. You can't, even though its more environmentally friendly.
I'm sure !fuck_cars@lemmy.ml would be happy to welcome you if you decided to go with buses.
- That community completely ignores reality for ~~millions~~ billions of people that absolutely need a car to live a life in the thousands of cities that don't have adequate public transportation and 100% of the rural areas in the world.
I miss my old 1999 Grand Marquis. Plenty of power, stupid easy to work on, rode like a dream, no tech bullshit. Fuel mileage was pretty crappy (owing to the V8 and curb weight) but it was a solid car. I largely drive cars until the die (did with that one too) and am thinking forward I may do the same and try to find older vehicles.
- Man I would loooooove to find an old like 95 Regal. Totally a grandpa car, but all the freaking amenities, better cushioning than your couch, leg room, bench seat half the time, a V8 that can't dump power and you can hold like 5 half racks under the hood if you needed too (tho pls don't) there's so much room.
  Not a knuckle of blood anywhere to be found.
  One thing I love about older cars from Detroit, definitely not the gas mileage but I can keep my spare fluids in the engine compartment lol
That's kinda extreme lol but I hope that companies start selling non smart cars. I don't want my car to be smart , I want my car to take me to point A and B , and be able to fix it myself.
I'll probably just fix up my GS500 and run that until petrol is outlawed. Possibly the last fully mechanical motor vehicle ever sold.
- I get what you're trying to say but gas engines are inherently electrical. That's how they generate the spark.
- My city doesn't even have bus fare. It's not like they're grabbing my biometrics when I step in. They're not trying to identify me when I walk on.
  You just walk on, wait, then walk off.
  It may not be the most private way of transport but it's not actively collecting data on you, which is what this is about.
  EDIT: Further, it's just easier for a car to collect data on it's owner. When you buy a car, you get a Title which registers the Vehicle Identification Number to the owners name. Then, when you're driving, because you're in public you're required to have your Drivers License, Registration, Insurance, a License Plate and up-to-date Tabs all very specific identifiers that identify both the driver and the car. The cars sensors only have to identify the owner, to whom it is already registered, and so they know the data they're collecting is from one person/one family.
  I've seen my cities bus budget. They have cameras on the bus for the protection of drivers but can barely afford them. They're definitely not dumping money into shit like facial recognition. I don't even need an ID to ride the bus. I can walk on with empty pockets and no one is gonna tell me I can't ride the bus without ID. If you drive without your license, you can get it taken away.
- Neither does just existing in public?
  That's not really the point with the car privacy issues.

Link to the mozilla research: https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/articles/its-official-cars-are-the-worst-product-category-we-have-ever-reviewed-for-privacy/

The Mozilla report in case some readers missed it: https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/articles/its-official-cars-are-the-worst-product-category-we-have-ever-reviewed-for-privacy/

People are starting to comment on the topic and take notice? That is great to hear. It is not often that this happens when such a study is released. It might be that ordinary people who lack the knowledge on the subject may be able to comprehend the concerns regarding privacy in cars more readily than in other areas. Whatever the case is, I'm happy the discussion is finally happening.

Huge props to Mozilla on this one - their article is clear and thorough. A lot of the studies are very vague, limited in scope, or way too technical, which makes them hard to share and discuss broadly.
- That is true and might be the reason the study is successful at raising public awareness about the topic.
I think it also has a little bit of shock factor. Everyone expects Google to be spying on you, so nobody is surprised when a report is released about a Google Home speaker being bad for privacy. When you’re buying the speaker, you’re making an active choice to trade privacy for convenience.
But the average person probably doesn’t expect that from their vehicle. I think lots of people are shocked to find out how much info their car has been collecting about them. Especially since cars aren’t usually considered a luxury in the US. To make the same comparison, a smart speaker is a luxury. You can opt out of the data collection by refusing to purchase one. You can do without it. But in most of the US, a car is a necessity, and this means that you can’t opt out of the data collection because you need a car to survive.
- Also, while Google collecting data on you means they use it for advertising, your vehicle collecting driving data on you absolutely can and will be eventually used for insurance coverage. Insurance companies are absolutely salivating at being able to prove people's bad driving habits with data and use those as ways to increase the cost of their coverage.
  Not loving the idea of being spied on by the insurance company dickbags just so they can look for any amount of "bad driving" as an excuse to pump up my rates.

I'm waiting for Elon to release a dumb tweet (xeet?) about how tesla has zero data collection

X-cretion
- Things are making more sense now lol
Are those sort of lies from a company's CEO punishable by fine or perhaps prison, or is flat-out lying about your company in a public statement totally cool, totally legal nowadays?

I'm not sure how much it matters that people are taking notice. If all cars are doing it, what can we do? It's not like people can't buy cars anymore and it's not like individual people can pay off politicians to make it illegal like large corporations can to make it legal.

The more people who notice, the more who care. The more who care, the more capital to be gained by proposing and / or supporting regulation.
We won't get free healthcare (in the states) or housing, but this is something trivial enough that I could see politicians making a play.
There are a few options I guess. If enough people notice then there may be more money in being the company that respects privacy and just charges more for the car up front.
It might even encourage more people to buy used instead of new.
Or some people might just decide they don't need a car.
Caring is the first step to actively doing something. The more people that know, the more that will care and the more people that will act. Gotta start somewhere.
Hopefully the EU gets pissed about it skirting around GDPR.

Ever since Jeep released their current gen Cherokee and two hackers revealed that they could hack into the entirety of the car by just knowing the phone number of the car's hotspot, I have avoided new cars like the plague

maybe I'm a little behind the times when it comes to cars, but shouldn't it be relatively trivial on the community scale to create foss head unit OS's? are there other components that phone home besides the head unit? most cars have replaceable head units anyway, right? I feel like I must be missing something here

Head units are no longer a seperate component.
Well… No. Head units are pretty much integrated units nowadays. That transition started back in the 2000’s, and pretty much any car after like 2012-2015 is going to have a fully integrated head unit. Unless the FOSS unit is custom made for the car, replacing the head unit would severely impact the car’s functionality. It’s not as easy as just wiring a power and audio cable in, and it hasn’t been for about a decade.
Ironically, I don’t even think that was the reason for making integrated head units. I think auto manufacturers realized that touch screens and PCBs were cheaper to mass produce and install. Analog control systems fell out of favor because they require a team of techs sitting on a manufacturing line wiring them together. But a PCB and touch screen can just be plugged in and screwed in by a single tech.
- Exactly. My car is 10-15 years old, and the touchscreen handles the climate control, radio, gps, phone, interior lighting, and ton of ancillary features. I doubt it's possible to replace the system with anything but an OEM replacement unless you're a really dedicated hardware hacker.
Feels like any car after around 2000 has an integrated head unit with other controls. Not easy or possible in many cases remove it without impacting the functionality of the car.
Have... you been in a new car in the last 20 years?

How exactly do they collect info other than GPS?

How are people interacting with the "radio" that it's given so much info?

Are new vehicles required to be connected to phone network to function?

What functionality is lost of not connected.

As a motorist who prefers to drive cheap cars that have a little tech as possible so that there is little to go wrong and what goes wrong I can fix myself I know nothing about the latest gen of cars

Cars are mandated to have a "SIM" (I don't know how this is implemented, that's a question for the engineers) inside that can be connected at all times. This was originally meant for faster accident response, and I'm assuming car companies have contracts with the Telecom companies (someone from the engineering/law teams help me here) to transmit data over their networks even when the user's devices are not connected
- If that's the case then why do cars cry about wanting internet connection for updates?

Frankly, I can't believe how many different posts I've seen about that article today. Amazing.

Thanks for this. I'm not in USA but I had chatgpt summarize my vehicle manufacturers privacy policy. Its wasn't great, so I sent an email to their privacy inbox. Next, I'll email my politicians.

There's no S in IOT

The S in IoT stands for Security
- My joke but better

That's why I'm glad I have an older car that doesn't have any computer crap in it. I don't want to have to jailbreak my car for it to be usable.

lol that's why I don't want a modern car. aside from the sensors in the engine, there's no others, so I'm not concerned about privacy lol

Guys honestly just buy a kei car like a Honda N-Van and a phone mount. 42 mpg, spacious, tons of cargo capacity, comparatively minuscule carbon footprint, and a basic 2din radio.

I don't have to worry about this stuff, because my car is too old to have RFID, or GPS tracking

Depending on your vehicle.. It's possible to remove all the Nanny tracking via some DIY hacks or even a call to "opt out"