funsec mailing list archives
OnStar and law enforcement (was: Wondering)
From: "Young, Keith" <Keith.Young () montgomerycountymd gov>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 10:21:04 -0400
It doesn't have to be a "trusted admin" -- putting my "evil" cap on,
it
could certainly be someone who impersonates a "trusted admin" or "interested party".
Right. So now we have an existence proof that OnStar has this
capability,
and the problem reduces to figuring out how to exploit it. I wonder if anyone there has considered the consequences that would ensue should someone penetrate their security and send out the signal to shut them *all* down.
This type of capability with OnStar (and the company's willingness to work with law enforcement) is nothing new: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/12/02/0415209 Question: Is this capability in YOUR cell phone? How do you know? What protections does your cell have to prevent someone from penetrating its security? --Keith Keith Young, Security Official Department of Technology Services Montgomery County, Maryland phone - (240) 777-2955 _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
Current thread:
- Wondering chaim . rieger (Oct 21)
- Re: Wondering security curmudgeon (Oct 21)
- Re: Wondering Buhrmaster, Gary (Oct 21)
- Re: Wondering steve pirk [egrep] (Oct 21)
- Re: Wondering Paul Ferguson (Oct 21)
- Re: Wondering Rich Kulawiec (Oct 22)
- OnStar and law enforcement (was: Wondering) Young, Keith (Oct 22)
- Re: Wondering steve pirk [egrep] (Oct 22)
- Re: Wondering Rich Kulawiec (Oct 22)
- Re: Wondering Buhrmaster, Gary (Oct 21)
- Re: Wondering security curmudgeon (Oct 21)