2003 Chrysler Town & Country Braun Handicap Conversion Power Options - Leather on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Feds fretting over remote hack of Jeep Cherokee

A cyber-security gap that allowed for the remote hacking of a Jeep Cherokee has federal officials concerned. An associate administrator with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said Thursday that news of the breach conducted by researchers Chris Valasek and Charlie Miller had "floated around the entire federal government." "The Homeland Security folks sent out broadcasts that, 'Here's an issue that needs to be addressed,'" said Nathaniel Beuse, an associate administrator with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Valasek and Miller commandeered remote control of the Cherokee through a security flaw in the cellular connection to the car's Uconnect infotainment system. From his Pittsburgh home, Valasek manipulated critical safety inputs, such as transmission function, on Miller's Jeep as he drove along a highway near St. Louis, MO. The scope of the remote breach is believed to be the first of its kind. The prominent cyber-security researchers needed no prior access to the vehicle to perform the hack, and the scope of the remote breach is believed to be the first of its kind. A NHTSA spokesperson said the agency's cyber-security staff members are "putting their expertise to work assessing this threat and the response, and we will take action if we determine it's necessary to protect safety." A Homeland Security spokesperson referred questions about the hack to Chrysler. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles has already been the subject of a federal hearing this month, in which officials scrutinized whether the company had adequately fixed recalled vehicles and repeatedly failed to notify the government about defects. But cyber-security concerns are a new and different species for the regulatory agency. Only hours before the Jeep hack was announced by Wired magazine earlier this week, NHTSA administrator Dr. Mark Rosekind said hacking vulnerabilities were a threat to privacy, safety, and the public's trust with new connected and autonomous technologies that allow vehicles to communicate. NHTSA outlined its response to the cyber-security challenges facing the industry in a report issued Tuesday. In it, the agency summarized its best practices for thwarting attacks and said it will analyze possible real-time infiltration responses. But the agency's ability to handle hackers may only go so far.

Question of the Day: Most heinous act of badge engineering?

Badge engineering, in which one company slaps its emblems on another company's product and sells it, has a long history in the automotive industry. When Sears wanted to sell cars, a deal was made with Kaiser-Frazer and the Sears Allstate was born. Iranians wanted new cars in the 1960s, and the Rootes Group was happy to offer Hillman Hunters for sale as Iran Khodro Paykans. Sometimes, though, certain badge-engineered vehicles made sense only in the 26th hour of negotiations between companies. The Suzuki Equator, say, which was a puzzling rebadge job of the Nissan Frontier. How did that happen? My personal favorite what-the-heck-were-they-thinking example of badge engineering is the 1971-1973 Plymouth Cricket. Chrysler Europe, through its ownership of the Rootes Group, was able to ship over Hillman Avanger subcompacts for sale in the US market. This would have made sense... if Chrysler hadn't already been selling rebadged Mitsubishi Colt Galants (as Dodge Colts) and Simca 1100s as (Simca 1204s) in its American showrooms. Few bought the Cricket, despite its cheery ad campaign. So, what's the badge-engineered car you find most confounding? Chrysler Dodge Automakers Mitsubishi Nissan Suzuki Automotive History question of the day badge engineering question

Fiat and UAW back at negotiating table over Chrysler stake

We knew there'd be no Chrysler IPO before the end of this year, but Fiat is determined to get the best run going into 2014 and is back at the poker table with the UAW. The delay was said to be Chrysler's desire to clean up a tax issue with the IRS; turns out that also bought the carmaker time to try and close a deal for the UAW's 48.5-percent stake in the company before the IPO happens.
Whereas the price Chrysler was willing to pay was once more than $1 billion under the UAW's asking price, the gap has closed to just $800 million of late. A recent valuation of the company at $10 billion - a valuation the UAW has disputed - means Fiat would be looking to pay about $4.2 billion instead of the $5 billion that the UAW seeks. But the UAW needs to hold out for the highest amount it can get because its pension obligations through the Voluntary Employee Benefit Association (VEBA) are $3.1 billion greater than the VEBA's assets, which include the Chrysler stake.
There's a clause in the agreement that Fiat can buy the VEBA shares for $6 billion, but Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne has said that the UAW "should buy a ticket for the lottery" if they even want $5 billion. The UAW, though, has more time to wait; it's Fiat that wants access to Chrysler's $11.9-billion war chest and that would like to avoid the risk of paying the full $6 billion for the UAW share if the float really takes off. With other valuations of Chrysler as high as $19 billion, a hot IPO could make that $6 billion look like a bargain.