←back to thread

Tesla said it didn't have key data in a fatal crash, then a hacker found it

(www.washingtonpost.com)
650 points clcaev | 8 comments | 29 Aug 25 11:15 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
fabian2k ◴[29 Aug 25 12:38 UTC] No.45063298[source]▶
Do I understand it correctly? Crash data gets automatically transmitted to Tesla, and after it was transmitted is immediately marked for deletion?

If that is actually designed like this, the only reason I could see for it would be so that Tesla has sole access to the data and can decide whether to use it or not. Which really should not work in court, but it seems it has so far.

And of course I'd expect an audit trail for the deletion of crash data on Tesla servers. But who knows whether there actually isn't one, or nobody looked into it at all.

replies(7): >>45063548 #>>45063617 #>>45064088 #>>45064532 #>>45065580 #>>45067599 #>>45069859 #
lgeorget ◴[29 Aug 25 13:07 UTC] No.45063617[source]▶
I guess one charitable way to look at it is that after a crash, external people could get access to the car and its memory, which could potentially expose private data about the owner/driver. And besides private data, if data about the car condition was leaked to the public, it could be made to say anything depending on who presents it and how, so it's safer for the investigation if only appointed experts in the field have access to it.

This is not unlike what happens for flight data recorders after a crash. The raw data is not made public right away, if ever.

replies(2): >>45063651 #>>45063981 #
fabian2k ◴[29 Aug 25 13:11 UTC] No.45063651[source]▶
If Tesla securely stored this data and reliably turned it over to the authorities, I wouldn't argue much with this.

But the data was mostly unprotected on the devices, or it couldn't have been restored. And Tesla isn't exactly known for respecting the privacy of their customers, they have announced details about accidents publicly before.

And there is the potential conflict of interest, Tesla does have strong incentives to "lose" data that implicates Autopilot or FSD.

replies(1): >>45063764 #
sanex ◴[29 Aug 25 13:20 UTC] No.45063764[source]▶
I would rather my cars not automatically rat me out to the authorities, personally.
replies(5): >>45064121 #>>45064171 #>>45066355 #>>45067755 #>>45072567 #
1. sfn42 ◴[29 Aug 25 16:43 UTC] No.45066355[source]▶
I think a world where drivers are held accountable for their actions sounds like a just and probably safer world.

If you cause an accident by driving distracted or being reckless I think it's only fair that the facts are known so that you can be punished accordingly. Certainly better than someone innocent having to share responsibility for your mistake.

I think that would probably make people think twice about being reckless and even if it doesn't at least they'll get what they deserve.

replies(1): >>45069638 #
2. atq2119 ◴[29 Aug 25 21:32 UTC] No.45069638[source]▶
I think this is the right way to look at it. Privacy is extremely important to me, but cars are basically lethal weapons. Using them on public roads has to come with a certain amount of responsibility that balances privacy against other goods.
replies(2): >>45074212 #>>45077594 #
3. sanex ◴[30 Aug 25 12:52 UTC] No.45074212[source]▶
Personally I believe the fifth amendment should protect me from self incrimination.
replies(1): >>45074410 #
4. sfn42 ◴[30 Aug 25 13:20 UTC] No.45074410{3}[source]▶
If you had security cameras at your home, a judge could issue a warrant for that footage.

Seems to me that smart car data is similar - in the event of a crash, a judge could issue a warrant for that data if it is deemed relevant to the case.

And either way, honestly, just don't drive like an idiot and this will never be a problem for you.

5. miohtama ◴[30 Aug 25 20:06 UTC] No.45077594[source]▶
Cars have been used on public roads a century without trackers
replies(1): >>45078307 #
6. sfn42 ◴[30 Aug 25 21:51 UTC] No.45078307{3}[source]▶
Yeah and a lot of innocent people have been financially screwed, injured and killed by idiots who don't appreciate the responsibility that comes with driving a car.

If technology can bring those people to justice I'm 100% for it, they deserve it and their victims deserve justice.

replies(1): >>45081848 #
7. miohtama ◴[31 Aug 25 09:40 UTC] No.45081848{4}[source]▶
If you want a society where everything and everyone is tracked, we already have it today. It's called China. No privacy comes with some trade offs.

I you are "100% for it" then you can move to China today.

replies(1): >>45082478 #
8. sfn42 ◴[31 Aug 25 11:53 UTC] No.45082478{5}[source]▶
I think it's pretty clear that this is not what I'm suggesting, if you can't see that then you're not arguing in good faith and I think my time is better spent on other things than discussing this with you.