2005 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Are future vehicular hacks inevitable?

Before the hack of the Uconnect system in a Jeep Cherokee resulted in a 1.4-million vehicle recall, the potential software vulnerabilities in vehicles were already a hot topic with Congressional inquiries and even proposed legislation in the US. As cars' interconnected systems gain the ability to go online, they become open to a host of new threats. Automakers are trying to stop this, but it might be too late to put the genie back into the bottle. Throughout 2015, the issue of software security in vehicles has become increasingly vital. For example, the recent Jeep case wasn't even the biggest hack this year. In February, a major flaw was discovered in the BMW Connected Drive service that allowed researchers to remotely lock and unlock the doors and potentially affected 2.2 million cars. The fix was an over-the-air patch for the problem. Automakers are actively working to fix the issues. Mercedes-Benz, BMW, and Audi reportedly are using encrypted connections and firewalls in their vehicles to prevent hacking. "Absolute, 100-percent safety isn't possible," Daimler spokesperson Benjamin Oberkersch said to Automotive News Europe. "But we develop our systems, tested by internal and external experts, so they're up to date." These vulnerabilities seem to be popping up more often. A successful hack took $14 in parts from Radio Shack in one case. There was also a 60 Minutes report earlier in the year about DARPA's ability to hack into OnStar to take control of a Chevrolet Impala. Experts aren't so sure companies can contend with hackers' advancement. "The difficulty for the carmakers at the moment is the question whether they can keep pace with advances in technology, and especially hacking technology," Rainer Scholz, executive director for telematics consultant EY, said to Automotive News Europe. "We seriously doubt they can." At this point, vehicle hacks are coming more from researchers looking for holes than from those with malicious intent. Still, the vulnerabilities are definitely there. It's up to automakers to keep patching the problems before they become dangerous to drivers. Related Video: News Source: Automotive News Europe - sub. req.Image Credit: Bill O'Leary / The Washington Post via Getty Images Audi BMW Jeep Mercedes-Benz Safety Technology Emerging Technologies hacking cyber security

EPA suspected Fiat Chrysler of using 'defeat device' in 2015

U.S. regulators told Fiat Chrysler Automobiles in November 2015 that they suspected some of the automaker's vehicles were equipped with secret software allowing them to violate emission control standards, according to emails disclosed on Friday. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and California Air Resources Board accused Fiat Chrysler in January of using the software, known as a "defeat device," to illegally allow excess diesel emissions in 104,000 Jeep Grand Cherokees and Dodge Ram 1500 trucks built between 2014 and 2016. Byron Bunker, director of the EPA's Transportation and Air Quality compliance division, said in a January 2016 email to Fiat Chrysler, obtained by Reuters under the Freedom of Information Act, that he was "very concerned about the unacceptably slow pace" of the automaker's efforts to explain high nitrogen oxide emissions from some of its vehicles. Nitrogen oxide is linked to smog formation and respiratory problems. Bunker's email said the EPA had told Fiat Chrysler officials at a November 2015 meeting that at least one auxiliary emissions control device on the car maker's vehicles appeared to violate the agency's regulations. Mike Dahl, head of vehicle safety and regulatory compliance for Fiat Chrysler's U.S. unit, responded in a separate email that the company was working diligently and understood the EPA's concerns. He added that if the EPA identified Fiat Chrysler vehicles as containing defeat devices it would result in "potentially significant regulatory and commercial consequences." The documents redacted the vehicles named, but two officials briefed on the matter said they referred to diesel models. The EPA's November 2015 meeting with Fiat Chrysler came two months after Volkswagen AG, mired in a major tailpipe emissions scandal, admitted to installing secret defeat device software in hundreds of thousands of U.S. diesel cars to make them appear cleaner than they were on the road.

Auto Mergers and Acquisitions: Suicide or salvation?

We love the Moses figure. A savior riding in from stage right with the ideas, the smarts, and the scrappiness to put things right. Alan Mullaly. Carroll Shelby. Lee Iacocca. Andrew Carnegie. Steve Jobs. Elon Musk. Bart Simpson. Sergio Marchionne does not likely view himself with Moses-like optics, but the CEO of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles recently gave a remarkable, perhaps prophetic interview with Automotive News about his interest and the inevitability of merging with a potential automotive partner like General Motors. Marchionne has been overtly public about his notion that GM must merge with FCA. For a bit of context, GM sold 9.9 million vehicles in 2014, posting $2.8 billion in net income, while FCA sold 4.75 million units and earned $2.4 billion in net income, painting a very rosy FCA earnings-to-sales picture. But that's not the entire picture. Most people in the auto industry still remember the trainwreck that was the DaimlerChrysler "merger" written in what turned out to be sand in 1998. It proved to be a master class in how not to fuse two companies, two cultures, two continents, and two management teams. Oh, it worked for the two individuals at both helms pre-merger. They got silly rich. And the industry itself was in a misty romance at the time with mergers and acquisitions. BMW bought Rolls-Royce. Volkswagen Group bought Bentley, Bugatti, and Lamborghini, putting all three brands into their rightful place in both products and positioning. No marriages there, so no false pretense. Finally, Nissan and Renault got married in 1999. A successful marriage requires several rare elements in this atmosphere of gas fumes and power lust. But a successful marriage requires several rare elements in this atmosphere of gas fumes and power lust, the principle part being honesty. Daimler and Chrysler lied to each other. The heads of each unit, the product planners, and finance all presented their then-current and long-range forecasts to each other with less-than-forthright accuracy. Daimler was the far greater equal and no one from the Chrysler side enjoyed that. The cultures were entirely different, too, and little was done to bridge that gap. Which brings me back to the present overtures by Marchionne to GM. "There are varying degrees of hugs," Marchionne stated in the Automotive News piece. "I can hug you nicely, I can hug you tightly, I can hug you like a bear, I can really hug you." Seriously?