This makes sense, because they want people to be able to subscribe to their services later without having to visit the dealership, so they make it possible to remotely enable the service.
I'm not sure if you can buy a tinfoil hat for a car.
This makes sense, because they want people to be able to subscribe to their services later without having to visit the dealership, so they make it possible to remotely enable the service.
I'm not sure if you can buy a tinfoil hat for a car.
Would be nice to have a organized online database of how to disconnect various "smart" devices— cars, TVs, appliances, etc.
Not really. Personal vehicles are responsible for such miniscule portion of co2 emissions it barely matters.
Emission regulations enjoy popular support because of city air quality, not climate change. Yes, people tolerate taxes on CO2 emitted by their vehicles (do you have that in the US BTW?) because it has a very beneficial side effect of also limiting particulates and NOx CO and such emissions that actually killed hundreds of people every year in major city centers. Also caused lifelong disability for many children(asthma).
> These attacks could be executed remotely on any hardware-equipped vehicle in about 30 seconds, regardless of whether it had an active Kia Connect subscription.
If this should tell companies anything is that most of these services should be opt-in instead of opt-out in favor of security and privacy.
OP was talking about not buying a car that requires a subscription to activate, not about whether the subscription makes you vulnerable.