Cities are suing car manufacturers over auto theft | Hacker News Reader

Cities are suing car manufacturers over auto theft

economist.com

29 pointsmfiguiere51 comments

Ford has a problem where all (?) their cars from around 2012 that have a physical door lock can be broken into with a screwdriver [0]. When I joined the Facebook group that I've linked, there were about 500 of us.

I don't have concrete evidence of this, however since criminals started breaking into our cars, the prevalence of crime related to identity and fraud increased because criminals suddenly had access to information on sometimes unencrypted hard drives.

My laptop bag got stolen in 2017, I parked at a shopping center to go pick up something at a store. I was in there for about 3 minutes, they took my laptop. It had my passport and other docs as I was on my way to apply for a visa.

A few weeks later I got alerts about someone trying to get credit with my details.

From my anecdata and hearsay, I'd accept that convenience crimes in this case increase other crimes.

I mean, if a getaway car is easy to find, it ups your chances at a robbery. Criminals have gotten good at the cat & mouse game with tracking companies. We also have an interesting problem where SUVs are stolen then trafficed across the border to Mocambique.

[0] https://www.facebook.com/groups/1879441885630599/

> It had my passport

Not trying to be rude but why wouldn't you keep something so precious on your person?...

You'll find your answer in the second half of the sentence you quoted.

Not to be rude.

Not to be rude, but you let your passport in a laptop bag with an actual laptop inside in plain sight in a mall parking lot because it would be just a couple minutes?

You're not at fault here, the thieves are, of course. Stealing sucks, and they probably did not care about your passport at all, but still...

I've done the same in the past, leaving my passport and stuff in the car in places I thought were safe. I got lucky so far, but I'll try to remember I was just lucky and be more careful in the future. Thanks for sharing.

> but still...

"Progressive" are pro-crime, as demonstrated by their victim-blaming and trite phrases like "the optimal amount of crime in a is non-zero".

I worked for an audit firm at the time, and the 'security guidelines' at the time were "leave your laptop in the boot where it is not visible".

As I had just come from work and was going to an embassy, I had printed everything I needed and kept it conveniently together. It wasn't programmed into me to walk around with valuables at shopping centres where they could get stolen there, and I wouldn't have thought to keep the passport in my pocket separated from everything else.

I also think because the laptops had multiple layers of security, and had relatively low replacement values, merely checking that the boot and doors are locked felt sufficient.

I learnt a lesson though, I no longer keep valuables in the car. I even have the boot cover thing removed so people can see that there's nothing in there.

There isn't much one can do to stop someone from breaking a window. Getting upset that the door lock can be broken with a tool is a waste of time. The reality is, the interior of the car is not secure from someone who wants in.

I recently made a "This Hyundai vehicle is equipped with a push-button ignition" window sticker for my Kona: https://imgur.com/a/KYDwnQc

I didn't want to claim "this car is unstealable lol" because I don't know if that's actually true, so instead I call attention to a fact that can be verified by inspection. If a thief intends to mess with a keyhole ignition, the sticker probably reduces the odds that they'll break in to look for one.

sorry bro I can't read. Even if I could, let me smash my way inside just to verify the sticker isn't lying

Now I'm wondering if anyone's making some money selling re-badging kits for these famously stealable cars. Like, to make it look like a citroen or something. I'd assume it'd be more useful than an aftermarket immobilizer, since the car's already busted by the time that's discovered.

This is absurd. If it wasn't a car but some other product, would cities still sue the manufacturer?

The only ones responsible are the criminals committing the illegal acts.

There are still places in the country where you can leave your car unlocked with keys in the ignition overnight, and it'll still be there in the morning.

The product is obviously defective compared to other manufacturers where this isn't a problem. This is not absurd it's pretty easy to understand. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_liability

Product is in full absolute legal compliance of regulations. The correct people to sue are those who approved these regulations and those who voted in people who approved them.

A car that is easy to steal is not a problem if there's no motivation to steal it. That's what I was alluding to with the last sentence of my post. This is a standard example of thinking that societal problems are best solved by technology, and all that does is drive us further into corporate dystopia.

Sure thing man we'll just solve crime lol.

Why do I feel like this is America forcing Korea, which has almost no car theft, to compensate for its own social problems?

Tell me why I'm wrong.

A key unlocks the car.

It is an implicit assumption, when buying a car, that it is not trivial to start the car without said key.

If you paid $2000 for a security door, just for the door to be opened by anyone with a credit card, would you not feel defrauded?

Or would you make a sorry jab at the culture of the people doing the harm, to play pretend devil's advocate in bad faith, just to stroke your petty ego, trying to induce a culture war?

Tell me why I'm wrong. [I totally deserve everyone's attention by the way! Look at me!!!11!]

Have lock smiths and people in prisons demonstrate how good/bad locks are.

Set up a rating system from say 0 to 100 where 0 is unlocked and anything that opens instantly using small hand tools is considered unlocked.

All locks get a rating of 5 until an official time is set. The videos are not shared but the current best time is published along with a statement from the manufacturer if they desire it.

A special tax for everyone to drive a vehicle that is considered unlocked as a permanent reminder and to pay for all of the above. While low at first, if there are few unlocked cars driving around the tax is higher.

>opens instantly

It's a probability distribution. I can get most residentials' + deadlock in 30 seconds total 25% of the time, just by raking (brute forcing) pin key combinations, 80% of most in under 3 minutes; switching to rake with a different wavelength shortens that, especially when a familiarity is developed, let alone picking.

But that's not even the issue -- especially moot since porcelain exists.

Similar to the (overly strong-handed) back-up camera mandate regulations, auto manufactures should be held to a higher standard for the most critical aspect of the vehicle: the authorization and authentication of its user is the intended operator.

There are tons of features on a car that countries force manufacturers to install, if they want to sell the car in that country. So, no America isn't forcing anyone to do anything. Of course is Kia wants to sell the car on America... But they don't have to install it on non American cars. For example a couple of years ago America mandated backup cameras. Some countries still get cars without backup cameras

If a security feature was required by law and car manufacturers decided to not include it then I can at least see a case, but as it stands this is ridiculous. The courts aren't a way to enforce unwritten legislation.

I'll go a bit further. If this sort of behaviour from politicians is tolerated, it will lead to perverse incentives. Why proactively create legislation when you can wait until there's a problem and THEN take action to garner support for reelection?

Never let a crisis go to waste...

Other people disagree. From the article:

"Todd Henderson, a legal scholar at the University of Chicago, says that on the face of it, the cities suing might have a case. It would rest, he says, on the argument that when a simple and cheap technology is available that can radically reduce the chance of a product causing enormous damage, “the non-inclusion makes the product defective.” A car that is so easily stolen might be analogous to an iron that does not automatically switch off, and so burns down a house."

So, if a company sells an iron that doesn't switch off when not in use and houses burn down, would you think lawsuits against that company are ridiculous? Or is that iron that burns houses down a defective product?

From my perspective, I've lived through this and I've had enough of the car thieves on my block. I hope Kia gets sued out of existence.

Well it isn't like the car steals itself. A better analogy either be if someone broke into the house and switched the iron on.

This is exactly why tort law exists, to argue in court that someone else is causing an undue burden and should compensate you.

> The courts aren't a way to enforce unwritten legislation.

OK, so some big company storing your PII gets hacked and you get hacked as a result and your bank account was drained. Assuming no laws were broken by the company storing your PII, should you not be entitled to sue? This is exactly why lawsuits exist.

If there are no digital privacy laws on the books, then no big company should ever be held responsible for a data breach, that's absurd.

That’s not really how civil court works though.

You don’t have to break the law to be judged to be liable for harming someone else financially in civil court.

Civil cases work on the “preponderance of the evidence.” The judge or jury must believe that your case is stronger than the other side’s case.

I think there is so much data pointing to Kia and Hyundai’s practice being unusual, and I’d guess that discovery will find out that decision makes at Hyundai knew that increased thefts would occur. If so, it stands to reason that they knew their decision to forego immobilizers would directly shoulder cities with extra costs.

It's a civil case. One of the main purposes of the civil law system is to address harms from things that are not illegal.

And in this case the problem isn't the manufacturers. But cities who have not invested sufficiently in both jail and police capacity.

Why isn't it the city's responsibility to prevent criminals from being able to commit crime? There are plenty of cities in the world with less than 1% of the car theft rate of these cities suing. It's hilarious to blame an auto manufacturer for a rampant crime problem.

I think this is solution for retail theft too.

Sue the manufacturer of stolen goods. Clearly they did not do enough to stop it. Exactly same logic. Cities should start the process to sue companies like Nestle.

>Over rap music

Tangential, but: that's an interesting detail to note. I've been told that TikTok's Chinese counterpart, Douyin, tends to push educational videos, rather than just entertainment, to youth. In effect, one could reasonably assume that the videos that are surfaced are ones that the app's owners want to be surfaced, to a particular consumer. I suppose we'll never know if an "over country music" clone exists. Likewise, it's interesting that associations with rap music is what The Economist wants us to make with the subjects of the article.

Related. Others?

Kias and Hyundais Keep Getting Stolen by the Thousands and Cities Are Suing - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37297271 - Aug 2023 (21 comments)

I Stole a Kia with a TikTok Hack [video] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37129683 - Aug 2023 (2 comments)

Hyundai Owner Rebadges Their Car as a Ford to Deter Thieves - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36913583 - July 2023 (1 comment)

The Kia Boys will steal your car for clout - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36587443 - July 2023 (1 comment)

Hyundai and Kia settle lawsuit worth $200M over vehicle theft due to TikTok - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36010085 - May 2023 (13 comments)

Kia and Hyundai agree to $200M settlement for making cars viral theft targets - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36005709 - May 2023 (1 comment)

Hyundai will pay $200M after a TikTok challenge exposed a security flaw - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36002679 - May 2023 (2 comments)

Hyundai, Kia agree to $200M settlement over U.S. car thefts - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35995821 - May 2023 (1 comment)

Baltimore sues Hyundai, Kia over spike in car thefts - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35915492 - May 2023 (612 comments)

Hyundai and Kia thefts keep rising despite security fix - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35890302 - May 2023 (1 comment)

Parts for stolen Hyundais and Kias are so scarce the cars are being totaled - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35767521 - April 2023 (201 comments)

Hyundai, Kia say they’ll fix millions of easily stolen cars - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35388757 - March 2023 (6 comments)

Ask HN: Why do we still have replay attacks on our cars? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35174625 - March 2023 (26 comments)

Teens Are Stealing More Cars. They Learn How on Social Media - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35124685 - March 2023 (4 comments)

The “Kia Boy” Crime Wave - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35010090 - March 2023 (2 comments)

Hyundai, Kia to update security on millions of vehicles after TikTok challenge - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34793414 - Feb 2023 (143 comments)

State Farm Won't Insure Theft-Prone Hyundai and Kia Models in Louisiana - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34672308 - Feb 2023 (4 comments)

State Farm says 105 Kia, Hyundai models ‘ineligible’ for new insurance in LA - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34642224 - Feb 2023 (90 comments)

Kia, Hyundai thefts using USB cords on the rise in TikTok trend, police say - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34468897 - Jan 2023 (6 comments)

Teens Killed in Buffalo Crash Were Attempting TikTok 'Kia Challenge' - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33356663 - Oct 2022 (13 comments)

How Thieves Are Stealing Hyundais and Kias with Just a USB Cable - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32899810 - Sept 2022 (1 comment)

Police, Car Owners Wrestle with Growing Thefts of Kias, Hyundais - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32770862 - Sept 2022 (1 comment)

CBS4: KIA and Hyundai vehicles an easy target for thieves, thanks to social medi - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32658332 - Aug 2022 (2 comments)

Kia and Hyundai vehicles across America are being stolen in seconds - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32626473 - Aug 2022 (1 comment)

Hyundai car security uses private keys from NIST example and OpenSSL tutorial - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32562407 - Aug 2022 (5 comments)

Blogger finds the private key used to sign Hyundai car software - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32458017 - Aug 2022 (1 comment)

Cars Are Too Easy to Steal - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30033629 - Jan 2022 (2 comments)

Hackers Can Clone Millions of Toyota, Hyundai, and Kia Keys - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22505256 - March 2020 (141 comments)

Why not sue people that steal the cars?

That's what insurance is for, at least as far as the owner is concerned. For the city, crime isn't sued, it's prosecuted. Fines/restitution could be used to recoup money for time spent on the case. Otherwise, punishment for the person committing GTA isn't to be sued.

because they usually don't have the kind of money that's worth suing over

Because they have no money

What do you think they do with the stolen cars, just keep them for themselves and use them to commute to their day job? The fences buying the cars (or ones leading the crime rings) sure have money.

Why not jail people who steals the cars?

Seems obvious solution. Something like 10 years in prison would stop them from causing more issues for good while.

What an outlandish claim. This is like suing bottle makers after you step on broken glass. If anyone is to blame it's tiktok and even that is fraught with free speech concerns

That's not an accurate comparison. The chief complaint cities have is that stolen cars result in other crimes, which drains law enforcement resources.

> Yet in 2015, 96% of new cars sold by other manufacturers did come with immobilisers, which cost at most a few hundred dollars. For Kia and Hyundai vehicles, the figure was just 26%. Todd Henderson, a legal scholar at the University of Chicago, says that on the face of it, the cities suing might have a case. It would rest, he says, on the argument that when a simple and cheap technology is available that can radically reduce the chance of a product causing enormous damage, “the non-inclusion makes the product defective.”

This seems like a reasonable argument to me, and Kia/Hyundai deserve to be pushed to answer why they're pinching pennies over a widely used, cheap and effective anti-theft technology.

Do cities have the right to block the sales of certain items based on this kind of logic? Do cities have the right to restrict what its citizens can purchase? What other methods would cities/states have? Pass local taxes on specific brands to "cover the costs" and encourage its citizens to purchase something else?

Conversely, automakers can demonstrate that the incidence of theft for identical car models is relatively low in other regions.

They can also show that car theft rate is highly collerated with retail theft.

> when a simple and cheap technology is available that can radically reduce the chance of a product causing enormous damage, “the non-inclusion makes the product defective.”

This is a reasonable argument (except for blaming poor anti-theft technology for "causing enormous damage"), but I don't like where it leads. Thefts would be further deterred if the car took a photo of the driver every time the engine starts (and used facial recognition to refuse to start if they're wearing a mask), then sent that photo, with date+time+GPS coordinates to a central server somewhere. There are countless other cheap and corrosive to liberty "solutions" you can use to deter crime. Like force cars to act as networked security cameras.

No laws have been passed, just a creative legal theory, and suddenly it's illegal to sell a car that's not an arm of the police state. I'd rather see the manufacturer just forced to reveal the known serious vulnerabilities before purchase.

Yeah, but you're taking it much further than they are. They're arguing that Kia should use an immobiliser that is standard in most other cars. They're not asking Kia to install cameras, etc. It's a sane default that deters crime because those other types of cars are stolen at a lower rate.

But am I taking it much further than they're going to? We've seen how anti-consumer, anti-privacy, anti-freedom technology becomes when left to its own devices. I'd rather not make it illegal to sell an ethical product when the "standard" set by other firms is abuse.

There is a reason many places do not allow glass bottles. It is because they turn into a hazard that is difficult to remediate completely when dropped, and dropping them is probable.

No, it would be like suing a couple bottle makers whose bottles are the source of the vast majority of broken glass people are stepping on, even though those bottles are just a small fraction of the bottles in use, and the reason their bottles are so much more likely to end up as broken glass is because there is a simple ingredient that can be added to bottles to make them much less likely to break but they only put that in about 25% of their bottles, whereas the other bottle makers put it in 96% of their bottles.

The cars in question are so much easier to steal than nearly every other car that in several cities insurers will no longer cover them.

There is no easy way to reject all cookies, so I am not reading.

"Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—e.g. article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Reply on news.ycombinator.com