Automotive hacking is the exploitation of vulnerabilities within the software, hardware, and communication systems of automobiles.

1. The Vulnerabilities In Automotive Networks Inc
2. The Vulnerabilities In Automotive Networks Reviews

A vulnerability assessment often includes a penetration testing component to identify vulnerabilities in an organization's personnel, procedures or processes that might not be detectable with network or system scans. The process is sometimes referred to as vulnerability assessment/penetration testing, or VAPT.

• 3Recent exploits

Overview[edit]

Modern automobiles contain hundreds of on-board computers processing everything from vehicle controls to the infotainment system. These computers, called Electronic control units (ECU), communicate with each other through multiple networks and communication protocols including the Controller Area Network (CAN) for vehicle component communication such as connections between engine and brake control; Local Interconnect Network (LIN) for cheaper vehicle component communication such as between door locks and interior lights; Media Oriented Systems Transport (MOST) for infotainment systems such as modern touchscreen and telematics connections; and FlexRay for high-speed vehicle component communications such as active suspension and active cruise control data synchronization.^[1]

Additional consumer communication systems are also integrated into automobile architectures including Bluetooth for wireless device connections, 4G Internet hotspots, and vehicle Wi-Fi.

The integration of these various communications and software systems leaves automobiles vulnerable to attack. Security researchers have begun demonstrating the multitude of potential attack vectors in modern vehicles, and some real-world exploits have resulted in manufacturers issuing vehicle recalls and software updates to mobile applications.

Manufacturers, such as John Deere, have used computer systems and Digital Rights Management to prevent repairs by the vehicle owners, or by third parties, or the use of aftermarket parts.^[2] Such limitations have prompted efforts to circumvent these systems, and increased interest in measures such as Motor Vehicle Owners' Right to Repair Act.

Research[edit]

In 2010, security researchers demonstrated how they could create physical effects and undermine system controls by hacking the ECU. The researchers needed physical access to the ECU and were able to gain full control over any safety or automotive system including disabling the brakes and stopping the engine.^[3]

In a follow-up research paper published in 2011, researchers demonstrated that physical access is not even necessary. The researchers showed that “remote exploitation is feasible via..mechanics tools, CD players, Bluetooth, cellular radio..and wireless communication channels allow long distance vehicle control, location tracking, in-cabin audio exfiltration and theft”.^[4] This means that a hacker could gain access to a vehicle's vital control systems through almost anything that interfaces with the automobile's systems.

Recent exploits[edit]

Fiat Chrysler UConnect[edit]

UConnect is Fiat Chrysler's Internet-connected feature which enables owners the ability to control the vehicle's infotainment/navigation system, sync media, and make phone calls. It even integrates with the optional on-board WiFi.^[5]

However, susceptibilities in Fiat Chrysler’s UConnect system, available on over 1.4 million cars, allows hackers to scan for cars with the system, connect and embed malicious code, and ultimately, commandeer vital vehicle controls like steering and brakes.^[6]

General Motors OnStar RemoteLink App[edit]

The OnStar RemoteLink app allows users the ability to utilize OnStar capabilities from their Android or iOS smartphones. The RemoteLink app can locate, lock and unlock, and even start your vehicle.^[7]

The flaw in General Motors’ OnStar RemoteLink app, while not as extreme as UConnect, allows hackers to impersonate the victim in the eyes of the RemoteLink app. This means that the hackers can access all of the features of the RemoteLink app available to the victim including locating, locking and unlocking, and starting the engine.^[8]

Keyless entry[edit]

The security researcher Samy Kamkar has demonstrated a device that intercepts signals from keyless-entry fobs and would allow an attacker to unlock doors and start a car's engine.^[9]

References[edit]

1. ^Petit, J., & Shladover, S. E. (2015). Potential cyberattacks on automated vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 16(2), 546-556. doi:10.1109/TITS.2014.2342271
2. ^Automakers Say You Don’t Really Own Your Car on eff.org (April 2015)
3. ^Koscher, K., Czeskis, A., Roesner, F., Patel, S., Kohno, T., Checkoway, S., .. & Savage, S. (2010, May). Experimental security analysis of a modern automobile. In Security and Privacy (SP), 2010 IEEE Symposium on (pp. 447-462). IEEE.
4. ^Checkoway, S., McCoy, D., Kantor, B., Anderson, D., Shacham, H., Savage, S., .. & Kohno, T. (2011, August). Comprehensive Experimental Analyses of Automotive Attack Surfaces. In USENIX Security Symposium.
5. ^'Autotrader - page unavailable'. www.autotrader.com.
6. ^Greenberg, A. (2015, July 21). Hackers Remotely Kill a Jeep on the Highway-With Me in It. Retrieved August 6, 2015.
7. ^'Mobile App'. www.onstar.com.
8. ^Finkle, J., & Woodall, B. (2015, July 30). Researcher says can hack GM's OnStar app, open vehicle, start engine. Retrieved August 27, 2015.
9. ^'This 'Gray Hat' Hacker Breaks Into Your Car — To Prove A Point'. NPR.org.

The security protocol used to protect the vast majority of wifi connections has been broken, potentially exposing wireless internet traffic to malicious eavesdroppers and attacks, according to the researcher who discovered the weakness.

Mathy Vanhoef, a security expert at Belgian university KU Leuven, discovered the weakness in the wireless security protocol WPA2, and published details of the flaw on Monday morning.

“Attackers can use this novel attack technique to read information that was previously assumed to be safely encrypted,” Vanhoef’s report said. “This can be abused to steal sensitive information such as credit card numbers, passwords, chat messages, emails, photos and so on.

Vanhoef emphasised that “the attack works against all modern protected wifi networks. Depending on the network configuration, it is also possible to inject and manipulate data. For example, an attacker might be able to inject ransomware or other malware into websites.”

The vulnerability affects a number of operating systems and devices, the report said, including Android, Linux, Apple, Windows, OpenBSD, MediaTek, Linksys and others.

“If your device supports wifi, it is most likely affected,” Vanhoef wrote. “In general, any data or information that the victim transmits can be decrypted … Additionally, depending on the device being used and the network setup, it is also possible to decrypt data sent towards the victim (e.g. the content of a website).”

Vanhoef gave the weakness the codename Krack, short for Key Reinstallation AttaCK.

Britain’s National Cyber Security Centre said in a statement it was examining the vulnerability. “Research has been published today into potential global weaknesses to wifi systems. The attacker would have to be physically close to the target and the potential weaknesses would not compromise connections to secure websites, such as banking services or online shopping.

“We are examining the research and will be providing guidance if required. Internet security is a key NCSC priority and we continuously update our advice on issues such as wifi safety, device management and browser security.”

The Vulnerabilities In Automotive Networks Inc

The United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team (Cert) issued a warning on Sunday in response to the vulnerability.

“The impact of exploiting these vulnerabilities includes decryption, packet replay, TCP connection hijacking, HTTP content injection and others,” the alert says, detailing a number of potential attacks. It adds that, since the vulnerability is in the protocol itself, rather than any specific device or software, “most or all correct implementations of the standard will be affected”.

The development is significant because the compromised security protocol is the most secure in general use to encrypt wifi connections. Older security standards have been broken in the past, but on those occasions a successor was available and in widespread use.

Crucially, the attack is unlikely to affect the security of information sent over the network that is protected in addition to the standard WPA2 encryption. This means connections to secure websites are still safe, as are other encrypted connections such as virtual private networks (VPN) and SSH communications.

However, insecure connections to websites – those which do not display a padlock icon in the address bar, indicating their support for HTTPS – should be considered public, and viewable to any other user on the network, until the vulnerability is fixed.

Equally, home internet connections will remain difficult to fully secure for quite some time. Many wireless routers are infrequently if ever updated, meaning that they will continue to communicate in an insecure manner. However, Vanhoef says, if the fix is installed on a phone or computer, that device will still be able to communicate with an insecure router. That means even users with an unpatched router should still fix as many devices as they can, to ensure security on other networks.

Alex Hudson, the chief technical officer of subscription service Iron, said that it is important to “keep calm”.

“There is a limited amount of physical security already on offer by wifi: an attack needs to be in proximity,” Hudson wrote. “So, you’re not suddenly vulnerable to everyone on the internet. It’s very weak protection, but this is important when reviewing your threat level.

What is cbbe body specialists. “Additionally, it’s likely that you don’t have too many protocols relying on WPA2 security. Every time you access an HTTPS site … your browser is negotiating a separate layer of encryption. Accessing secure websites over wifi is still totally safe. Hopefully – but there is no guarantee – you don’t have much information going over your network that requires the encryption WPA2 provides.”

There’s likely to be a delay before the vulnerability is used to actually attack networks in the wild, says Symantec researcher Candid Wuest. “It’s quite a complex attack to carry out in practice, but we’ve seen similar before, so we know it’s possible to automate.

The Vulnerabilities In Automotive Networks Reviews

“Small businesses and people at home should be concerned, but not too worried,” Wuest added, advising most users to simply apply the updates to their software as and when it becomes available.

The most important lesson from the weakness, he said, was that relying on any one security feature is risky. “You shouldn’t be trusting one single point of failure for all your security. Don’t rely on just your wifi, use a VPN or secure connection for anything important.”

Different devices and operating systems are impacted to differing degrees based on how they implement the WPA2 protocol. Among the worst hit are Android 6.0 (Marshmallow) and Linux, due to a further bug that results in the encryption key being rewritten to all-zeros; iOS and Windows, meanwhile, are among the most secure, since they don’t fully implement the WPA2 protocol. No tested device or piece of software was fully immune to the weakness, however.

The international Cert group, based at Carnegie Mellon University, informed technology companies of the flaw on 28 August, meaning that most have had around a month and a half to implement a fix. The Guardian has asked Apple, Google, Microsoft and Linksys the status of their patches. Google said: “We’re aware of the issue, and we will be patching any affected devices in the coming weeks.” Microsoft said: “We have released a security update to address this issue. Customers who apply the update, or have automatic updates enabled, will be protected.” No other vendor has replied at press time.

• Your iPhone’s password demands aren’t just annoying. They’re a security flaw