Secret Data gathering

[DaveK]

Take the point. If it is not a privately owned car then the issue is whether you have agreed with the cars owner to be monitored by anything which stores data. The technology now exists to put tiny minute data recorders in everything we own. What about one in your fridge freezer so that the makers can see how often you opened the door so as to block any warranty claim on the basis of 'over use ' ?
Ok with me if I am told it is there when I buy the product, allowing me to choose such an option , not ok if it is secretly installed.

 

[st4]

Take the point. If it is not a privately owned car then the issue is whether you have agreed with the cars owner to be monitored by anything which stores data. The technology now exists to put tiny minute data recorders in everything we own. What about one in your fridge freezer so that the makers can see how often you opened the door so as to block any warranty claim on the basis of 'over use ' ?
Ok with me if I am told it is there when I buy the product, allowing me to choose such an option , not ok if it is secretly installed.

I second that, resisting such devices now will make for a better future.

Cars monitor how they are drive, but there should be legistlation in place to ensure the data they gather doesn't include speed, lateral acceleration etc to protect the normal citizen.

 

[DansSlk]

I wouldn't mind that so much if you could turn off the black box function, but if it was fitted in the first place it would allow the law in future years to make it mandatory as the technology is in place.

However if its not there, it keeps the state from using such technology to put into place the road pricing GPS based system that gets mentioned. Thats the concept I would like to get across. If we wish to keep things how they are, then we have to resist changes that could upset that.

Again as the data is the stored in the car and its owned by the car owner, thats not strictly true these days. A significant quantity of cars are financed through PCP and HP where the actual owner is a finance company, so strictly speaking the data recorded is theirs. Lorries and planes have black boxes, but they aren't the property of the trucker or pilot, and its there to monitor the owners property entrusted to the trucker/pilot.

Company cars could have black boxes I suppose on the basis that the company wants to ensure you don't use their property for your own benefit.

In a privately owned car this is not an issue.

Perhaps those who "own" their cars may have more of a leg to stand on the basis of this argument.

Just in case i was not clear above i agree with this point and if fitted to my car the system would always be switched off!

Take the point. If it is not a privately owned car then the issue is whether you have agreed with the cars owner to be monitored by anything which stores data. The technology now exists to put tiny minute data recorders in everything we own. What about one in your fridge freezer so that the makers can see how often you opened the door so as to block any warranty claim on the basis of 'over use ' ?
Ok with me if I am told it is there when I buy the product, allowing me to choose such an option , not ok if it is secretly installed.

So what your saying is if you don't own the car you should be made aware that when your driving it the computer will be recording you, again totally fair enough i agree 100%

I second that, resisting such devices now will make for a better future.

Cars monitor how they are drive, but there should be legistlation in place to ensure the data they gather doesn't include speed, lateral acceleration etc to protect the normal citizen.

Is this for recording or simply monitoring? If its recording then lets hope that if something like this does become mandatory we have the option to switch it off or erase the data.

If we are talking about simple monitoring here and by that i mean one car system watching another and the data staying within the car at all times then there is no way that sort of data acquisition will ever be prohibited, using your example your car would not be able to tell you how fast you where moving and the ESP system would not be able to function at all.

 

[nick mercedes]

Cars monitor how they are drive, but there should be legistlation in place to ensure the data they gather doesn't include speed, lateral acceleration etc to protect the normal citizen.

I'd like a car without *any* black boxes, tracking devices, satnav or ecus.

Why make things so complex?

 

[st4]

Both, recording is fine for a non privately owned car, but I illustrate @ the end of the post a legal shortcoming of a blackbox. Monitoring is fine it is used by the real owner to monitor their vehicles use. (like a tracker as the owner has a) a choice of companies and b) has the option to fit it).

Ah the ESP question (its a good question)? This is a real time process and none of this is stored, however on impact the computer may well indicate something about the cars speed, braking force and lateral acceleration. Its this sort of information that should not be recorded or used. I'd like to see that sort of data acquistion prohibited as its a form of technology being used to gain information that could be used to incriminate.

I agree comletely that if I ever had a device like that, I'd have it switched off, but I'd rather not have it their in the first place if I owned the car. If I didn't, then fair cop, its @ the owners discretion to monitor my use of their car, and any accident monitoring tech to be used is @ their discretion.

I am afraid that insurers may make it mandatory and I'd like legislation to protect citizens in the future that they have the right to decline such a device and the use of information gathered in the car not to be used in the event of criminal proceedings. Its an extension of the "right to be silent". By some computer telling the police what you've been doing "your right to remain silent" has been relinquished.

 

[DaveK]

The devices implanted my well have been put there by manufacturers for the best of reasons to start with but the case in the opening post illustrates how quick the authorities are to seize on such things and use them to their advantage.

 

[st4]

The devices implanted my well have been put there by manufacturers for the best of reasons to start with but the case in the opening post illustrates how quick the authorities are to seize on such things and use them to their advantage.

What about the driver of the range rovers right to remain silent, and not give evidence that may further incriminate him. No, his car removed that right and gave the incriminating evidence for him. Of course the masses won't see it like that as they'll see "a bad rich kid" and a "sweet little girl".

 

[DansSlk]

Sorry ***, i should have explained better by monitoring i did mean real-time for instance the cluster monitoring the CAN for the engine speeds or the Rear SAM watching the CAN for the position of the indicator stalk.

I mostly agree with your post, if the owner is happy to have data stored great if he's not then its not stored but i can see it from a manufacturer's point of view also that parameters should be kept for warranty purposes, if i use BMW M as an example here they build a launch control system into the SMG gearbox but it puts huge stress on it and will reduce its life so they have placed a 11 activation (from memory here so it could be wrong) limit on the warranty and why should they then have to pay out for a new gearbox if the owner broke the warranty terms? If they where not able to look and check how many times the system was activated they would have no choice but to pay out for a lot of gearboxes.

I just want to point out that the data currently logged is not time stamped so for prosecution purposes i imagine its useless just as it should be UNLESS the owner has enabled a system to record that.

 

[Colin_b]

If its capable of being stored it is, no different to fault codes so name your parameter.

While it is mostly your data i doubt many places will be willing to turn it over in case it comes back to bite them, the car does not discriminate between owners so its not always yours.

Of course if you have DAS you can get your hands on whatever you want.

Thanks Dan. It would be interesting to see exactly what data is being stored, I'm guessing MB wouldn't add cost & complexity to store data that isn't needed to run and manage the car (and probably some warranty type stuff).

What is a DAS - I'd guess its some sort of interface handling device between the car's control system and the outside world?

It would be useful if you could extract that data in the event of an incident.

 

[DansSlk]

Yeah thats true they don't spend any extra money on it but since just about every bit of info the car generates is related to running the car all it does it hold some of it in memory, it doesn't store silly things like your fav radio station but things that can be useful such as how much time it spends on the reline and max speeds.

DAS is the diagnostic tool we use at the dealers or i should say SDS is the tool we use and DAS is an application running on it.

 

[crockers]

What about the driver of the range rovers right to remain silent, and not give evidence that may further incriminate him. No, his car removed that right and gave the incriminating evidence for him. Of course the masses won't see it like that as they'll see "a bad rich kid" and a "sweet little girl".

Sorry but what right to remain silent....I think that went out the window ages ago -- I am not sure of the wording of the caution nowadays (Carrotchomper will know) but I dont think you have the right to remain silent as per say....

 

[crockers]

Dan... many firms advertise ecu remapping etc and say when you have the car serviced no-one can detect it...Is this therefore true? Surely readings will be changed and therefore make it detectable....

 

[Swiss Toni]

Sorry but what right to remain silent....I think that went out the window ages ago -- I am not sure of the wording of the caution nowadays (Carrotchomper will know) but I dont think you have the right to remain silent as per say....

You do have the right to remain silent, but if you chose not to answer questions it is for the court to draw appropriate conclusions from that silence.

 

[DansSlk]

Dan... many firms advertise ecu remapping etc and say when you have the car serviced no-one can detect it...Is this therefore true? Surely readings will be changed and therefore make it detectable....

Yeah your right its never un-detectable, its just software at the end of the day and when you know what your looking for you can usually tell quite quickly when something has been changed.

 

[ckember]

do all cars with airbags have this data logger or only the prestige manufacturers?

 

[st4]

I don't know, I would suspect all manufacutuers

 

[richard]

Ok, this got me investigating. (using Star Diagnosis)

Theres not enough memory/flash etc in *most* ecus on the car to store anything except event data.
Event data being
a) airbags triggered, so better keep a record of why for the case when we (manafacturer) get sued
b) emissions event data - something happened , why ?
This data is really kept for fault diagnosis.

I say *most*, because there is one exception, the Sat nav unit - it has lots of computing power, and memory, and of course in the latest W221.W204 a hard disk.
Looking at that, in Star Diagnosis, on a W164 (i.e no hard disk), it is keeping records of things that happen (in an event log) including where it happens. But I havent yet worked out what the events are logging - is it faults (and everything is logged because it can be), or is it keeping more interesting info. Will look again in a few days to see if my log has changed

Anyone got a W204 with COMAND I can look at with Star Diagnosis - see what that is recording ???

Richard

 

[DansSlk]

Keep hunting mate I'm sure you'll find it, there is more.

Things like peak RPM's and so on.

I have/had a wonderful DAS report that was given to me a few years back with shed loads of information on it, i don't mean silly things like how often i use the indicators but some very interesting stuff so i will have a look in my office/attic later and see if i can find it and scan.

Remember that these are just values stored the same as fault codes or coding strings so you can get a lot in a small space and technically of course it is event data (i.e was my redline hit and how long was i kept there for), not trying to hint about being spied upon certainly i saw nothing that i did not think had a perfectly valid reason to be stored.

 

[graeme73s]

The american pick up truck that I use as my daily driver has the down load plug in facility. In the US you have the option to prove you are innocent by the plug in facility or to refuse. It is your choice and right to do so. This I find acceptable. In the UK you would not be given the choice, data would be taken against your will which is unacceptable. Data never takes circumstances into consideration.

 

[DaveK]

That sums up Britain graeme73s .We have less and less rights with each passing year. 'Data never takes circumstances into consideration.' so well put.