MadRadar attack causes automotive radar to 'hallucinate'
allaboutcircuits.com
allaboutcircuits.com
LIDAR has the same problem and the same countermeasures. Pulsed LIDAR units should have a few microseconds of random jitter in the pulse timing, too. You can still get a collision, but not multiple consistent collisions in a row, so you know it's noise.
Also, it doesn't take nearly the sophistication of the system demo'ed here -- a chaff canister released into traffic would, I imagine, play twenty kinds of havoc on any autonomous driving system that relied on radar.
People who are interested in finding out more can look up Digital Radio Frequency Memory (DRFM) jammers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_radio_frequency_memory
I don't mean to sound pessimistic, but the link's assertion that any of these techniques are new suggests that either allaboutcircuits is not familiar with radar/electronic attack or that Duke University and/or the automative radar folks are not up to speed with techniques used in radar/electronic attack in the defense/aerospace industries. Maybe it's the latter, as the arXiv preprint states "...show the novel ability to effectively ‘add’ (i.e., false positive attacks), ‘remove’ (i.e., false negative attacks), or ‘move’ (i.e., translation attacks) object detections...".
These are open data, too. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_jamming_and_deception.
The arXiv preprint doesn't list any of the usual suspects for radar or electronic attack sources that I would expect to see in its references. There are a lot of automotive radar sources and, interestingly enough, some LiDAR and LiDAR adversarial attacks instead.
More generally maybe but not always. If you wanted to use a DRFM jammer to insert false targets in an imaging radar, the bandwidths required may be a challenge.
There are commercial SAR satellite operators that you (for some definition of you — I personally couldn’t afford it) can buy from that sell imagery that’s got a resolution of 0.5 meters per pixel. That would require a bandwidth of about 300MHz. I haven’t looked at the SDR landscape in awhile but when I did that was sort of sporty — by that I mean >300 complex megasamples a second (for Nyquist, not including any oversampling).
And that would be after basebanding in analog before sampling to digital.
Yes, their POC uses SDR
This is absolutely normal when driving on American roads at night these days.
My cousin got a new truck and he said everyone now flashes their lights at him but his lights are on low. His previous truck was fine but this new model is terrible. It's not just trucks it's cars too.
I'm ready to go to my member of parliament to ask WTF?
There is some talk about regulating minimum projected area for a given amount of power to reduce this effect somewhat.
Set some rules for how bright lights are allowed to be.
Oh, that Jeep was running red lights on the front. I thought that vehicle was heading away from me.
Every state has laws that when a vehicle is in forward motion on a road, that the only permissible colored lights are white and amber. Yes illegal.
If people want to mess up traffic they can drop a concrete block off an overpass, run a heavy chain across the road, change signage, use tire shredders or do any number of antisocial things. Many of which are extremely cheap and not preventable.
Probably the most novel factor would be that sensor disruption is more deniable than many other threats to drivers.
But how much additional cost/expense would that justify? Technically mitigating every risk isn't really possible, at some point you have to fall back to the legal system.
There's another aspect to it: sure you could disrupt traffic with all the means you cited, but you had to be there physically, and you'd run the very likely risk of being caught and beaten up by angry drivers.
With invisible and electronic means like this, all it takes is to put a box with the jamming kit and a small battery near the road and you can trigger it when you're far, and you could even trigger it in many big roads at the same time and see the chaos you caused.
Why would you do that? For the same reason a few people send false bomb alerts for the police to evacuate places, and others SWAT streamers. Out of pure naughtiness.
Dropping caltrops on a secondary road at night would also work. Rigging a drone to drop chaff on a freeway, etc, would also get the perpetrator physically away from the action. Really, with some creativity, surprisingly crude attacks can shut down a road with minimal exposure of the perp.
A decade ago, the Beltway Sniper terrorized my neighborhood for two weeks. It turned out to be a teenage boy and a certifiably insane adult with some military training. A similar attack by someone who actually knew what they were doing and who wasn't addled would have been very, very difficult to catch. Much less if the attack were, say, from wooded roadsides that overlooked interstates.
Dropping a handful of nails over an overpass is unlikely to be noticed, much less attract retaliation from the victims
https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a15131074/how-to-adjus...
After I got my most recent vehicle I discovered it has a 24GHz rear-facing radar in order to alert me to a possible car in my blind spots. It misfires all the time and alerts me to guard rails and phantoms that don't exist. I don't need it, because I now keep my side mirrors set correctly I know where cars are beside me before the radar knows. I turn it off but now I'm curious if that actually deactivates the radar emitter or just stops alerting me to hits.
It's not there to replace you looking. It's there as an extra information source in case you make a mistake when looking. Maybe you're lucky with the your car, but even with curved ends of mirrors in mine, there's still a blind spot where I would not see a bike on the passenger's side and the little extra notification is great for that. It blinks for guard rails too, but that doesn't bother me - there's extremely rarely a reason to check the mirror on the side close to the rail.
> there's extremely rarely a reason to check the mirror on the side close to the rail.
...
You're literally responding to my post where I say this is not possible on my car. There's no orientation which doesn't leave a small blind spot. Not large enough for most cars, but definitely enough to hide a person/bike.
> The problem doesn't exist if people were just taught how to properly adjust their mirrors in the first place.
The problem being solved here is that, no matter how many mirrors of any configuration one has, they are still a squishy human who will eventually make a mistake, given that mirrors are used hundreds of times per driving trip. Or they bad-luck into a situation where another driver changes the situation faster than a reasonable, human mirror-checking regimen would reveal. These systems add a layer of safety for when, not if, that happens.
Each time I visit US I'm frustrated by the american cars having flat mirrors. The blind spots are insane. I guess it's due to some weird regulation?
In EU mirrors have their last 2-4cm curved, and there's virtually no blind spot, and you don't need to adjust mirrors too precisely even.
Definitely not everywhere in the EU. My Yaris has flat mirrors.
When crossing under some bridges, sometimes it decelerates and warns me of a collision, even if there is no one there. I have to override it by stepping on the gas pedal until I’m through.
I’ve also felt it hiccup on a test strip where they were testing radars, I was guessing it was due to them using similar frequencies, but I’m not sure on that one.
Also, their original solution did sensor fusion with LIDAR, but the vendor find out and blew a gasket - because the LIDAR sensors weren't designed for safety-critical operation and to my understanding became a potential liability for the maker if they continued to supply them for incorrect use knowingly.
When did Tesla have LIDAR?
I unfortunately don't have link about supplier dropping them - I do recall it was a bit of a scandal at the time but it quickly got overshadowed with other issues and well, FSD not working right was "business as usual"
Amazing. We've gone full circle now. I wonder if this is a problem of generational differences in knowledge transfer ... or rather the lack of it.
You can notice this in a lot of hardware products with "noob" mistakes that the prior product generation did not have etc. Software is probably the same but the product is too opaque to see into so ot just feels crappy.
how long until smart 12 year olds can remotely hijack major car brands on a freeway with a laptop and a small python script?
[0]: https://jalopnik.com/chryslers-uconnect-vulnerable-to-remote...
Now as far as keeping thieves out it is far less useful as it can be cut with a very sharp object (same things firefighters do if they need to take someone out of a car with such films).
In fact, for safety, I did keep the rear glass without a film.
Fortunately, I no longer need to drive though that place but when I did, it made a world of a difference.
Similarly to glass with an embedded wire mesh.
The glass is gone anyways, but the goal is never to save the glass (that’s impossible, I guess) but to dramatically minimize the risk of personal injury.
Steering? Rails.
Anti-collision? Signals.
Fuel/Charging? Overhead power lines.