How to protect against SARA - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: amateur_25
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2019, 02:07:53 pm
content: HII am just surprised at how bloody simple and genius this SARA attack is.The fact that we can get our hands on things cheaply now is creating security threats by making it accessible to hackers but it is a double edge sword.I was wondering do you experts have any ideas on how to make our cars more secure.I was thinking of using time domain reflectometry then you can tell how far the key is.The fact that the signal is being amplified doesn't work around the fact Rf signal take time to travel through free air does it?Maybe Dave can make a video on ithttps://www.wired.com/2017/04/just-pair-11-radio-gadgets-can-steal-car/

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2019, 03:25:55 pm
content: Quote from: amateur_25 on November 15, 2019, 02:07:53 pmMechanical lock/key. Something solid that looks too much like hard work for the thieves.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2019, 04:01:41 pm
content: Quote from: amateur_25 on November 15, 2019, 02:07:53 pmThe problem is not "making things accessible to hackers" but bloody clueless manufacturers that put gizmos that nobody really needs in cars without understanding neither the technology nor the security/safety implications and think that if they keep stuff secret it is somehow going to be secure.The SARA attack is impossible if you require a physical key in the ignition (as was standard for decades) and not just "nearby" (= RFID). However, in the name of convenience and gee-whiz keyless pushbutton ignition (= a feature you can charge more for!) your car can be now stolen with a cheap box of electronics in a few seconds, with no trace of forced entry (so many insurances will refuse to pay).One way to fix this issue would be requiring a check that the keyfob/card is physically in the vehicle - e.g. by inserting it in a reader with physical contacts, not just RFID (some older vehicles had such system). But then we are effectively back to the key-in-the-ignition setup, just the key is replaced by a fob ...You can't use reflectometry - there is no reflection to measure. And measuring response times is notoriously unreliable, e.g. because of interference, keyfob not reacting right away, etc. which will swamp the time of flight of the radio signal that you could use to determine distance. Signal intensity detto.Quote from: SilverSolder on November 15, 2019, 03:25:55 pmNot necessarily, even the good old rolling code pushbutton thing is more secure than this. There are tricks that can be used to bypass it (google Logjam attack), but it is much more finicky and complicated for the thieves to reliably execute it, so likely few will bother - smashing a window or forcing a door lock is easier.The SARA vulnerability is effectively unfixable without ditching the entire system with the RFID fobs. If you don't want to have your car stolen or burgled, don't buy a car with this. Fortunately, this stupid system is optional on most brands that have it.This is called progress - solving a "problem" that wasn't really a problem to begin with (what is so difficult or inconvenient about having to insert a key in the ignition?) and causing several new, much worse ones.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2019, 04:48:36 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on November 15, 2019, 04:01:41 pmI fully second that. Making ignition keys "wireless" (not requiring any physical contact) was the most mind-boggingly stupid move we could ever think about. Some cars actually have RFID-like keys in various shapes (not necessarily key shape), but requiring to be inserted in some kind of slot. This is already a bit safer.But it all comes from the same lazy attitude customers have grown accustomed to. Just like now there are mobile phone apps as payment means, replacing credit cards. The selling point is just that the customer will never have to worry about having their credit card(s) with them. How hard is it really? Soon we'll see mobile phone apps to unlock and start your car while we're at it, and your house door (already exists!) it follows the same logics. Apparently these days, all you're supposed to have with you is a fucking mobile phone (and you better have one!!) It's also funny how it has managed to become so indispensable that everyone now assumes that you can forget/lose absolutely any object, except your mobile phone. Apparently mobile phones are now almost implanted so nobody's supposed to be without one at all times.Ah ah, just some thoughts about how stupid we're becoming and how natural it is that it's bound to backfire in nasty ways.

author: DimitriP
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2019, 05:18:46 pm
content: QuoteThis "accustomed to" is mostly result of one idiot manufacturer producing abluetooth gardenhosethe feature, then every other manufacturer having to catch up,or they are perceived as lagging behind in technology. Customers follow like sheep because "new" is "better" and so the cycle goes....After all. "lane detection" can prevent an accident while you are reading the latest tweet from your favorite twit!!!

author: AndyC_772
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2019, 05:28:34 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on November 15, 2019, 04:48:36 pmhttps://www.bmwblog.com/2018/11/17/video-heres-how-the-bmw-digital-key-works/

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2019, 06:06:25 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on November 15, 2019, 04:48:36 pmThat exists already - the infamous Tesla Summon feature does exactly that, plus it is supposed to make the car come to you from wherever you have parked it. Assuming it doesn't cause an accident in the process, of course (just google it, there are plenty of really scary videos online already).However, a phone app is still more secure than an RFID keyfob - a phone app talking to your car over internet is much more difficult to spoof for your average thief.Of course, that assumes the manufacturer isn't a complete idiot and the internet interface in the car doesn't have more security holes than the Swiss cheese ... Not holding my breath for it, especially after the Jeep fiasco (if you don't know what that was about:https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/).

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2019, 06:15:29 pm
content: Quote from: AndyC_772 on November 15, 2019, 05:28:34 pmIsn't that using NFC (i.e. RFID) on the phone? That would explain the need to put it on the charging pad (= RFID reader) in the car to pair it. If that's the case, that is not really any different than the keycard/fob, just you can explicitly turn NFC on the phone off and thus prevent the attack (but who is going to remember to do that every time?).

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2019, 06:25:37 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on November 15, 2019, 06:15:29 pmI suspect it's NFC indeed.Anyway, from what I gathered from the article posted by the OP, the hack would require having access both to the key AND the "keypad" inside the car, the only thing is that both wouldn't have to be close to each other. Nice trick, but to be victim of this is relatively unlikely. What's the real life scenario in which you would be victim of this, and in which it still would be more practical for people willing to steal a car than directly using the key? How would they enter the car to begin with? Not all very clear. Sounds a bit like a nice trick with relatively little impact? (May have missed something though!)I consider any wireless system (with longer range, such as bluetooth, wifi, LoRa...) much more risky in real life than NFC.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2019, 07:34:33 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on November 15, 2019, 06:25:37 pmAFAIK, the system works like that that the car unlocks automatically when you approach it with the RFID fob - the assumption is that this works only at a very short distance. Then to start the car you need to only press the Start button on the dash, you don't need the keypad nor anything. So the attack works by simply extending the range of the original keyfob so that the car reacts to the (genuine) signal and allows you to unlock it and start it. Of course, you must not turn the engine off afterwards or you would be never able to start it again.It is certainly not a theoretical attack - thefts of the higher end models of BMW cars with this system have gone through the roof.See e.g. this video:The guys seem to struggle a bit, the keyfob is probably farther away from the door (door is a logical choice - most people hang their keys near the door). There are purpose-made devices available on the internet for this - thieves don't lug an SDR and a laptop around, even though the crooks in the video may have a laptop in that bag (but it looks like it has a handle at one point, so perhaps not).Renault has the same problem with their system, just the thefts are not that prevalent because, well, it is Renault and those aren't all that desirable.Quote from: SiliconWizard on November 15, 2019, 06:25:37 pmDepends on what you use it for. RFID on your credit card isn't going to do a lot of damage, because most banks limit the transactions to about 20 euros and demand a pin code after 3 of them. So you would be out of 60 bucks at most. Of course, a thief could sit e.g. in a railway station or in front of a supermarket siphoning money off the customers passing by but it would be risky and difficult to be inconspicuous sitting around with a large antenna required for it. Furthermore, it would need a merchant account somewhere so that you could actually cash that haul out - another potential point of failure where you could get caught (unlike with stolen credit card numbers + pins where you duplicate the card on a blank and go to an ATM, with the contactless transactions you need to send them to a bank for clearing at some point).The same with the chips in your passport.However, if someone uses this technology for stupid purposes, such as protecting a high value item (a car or a house), then you are going to have problems. The crooks will have sufficient motivation to invest in the necessary technology if the payout is that big.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2019, 08:40:26 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on November 15, 2019, 04:48:36 pmAre there any luxury cars which don't currently have this feature? Most have had it for a few years, and its working down to the cheaper cars.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2019, 08:58:46 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on November 15, 2019, 07:34:33 pmI think most of them work like my Volvo. If you touch the door handle with the key fob close to the car it unlocks. Its the same with the "waving your foot" feature to open the tailgate. It only works when the keyfob is very close to the car. Usually within about a metre. Without the keyfob inside the car the engine won't start when you twist the start knob (its a button in most cars, but Volvo use a knob for some reason. I assume a really strong signal from outside the car would work, but the keyfob won't allow the engine to start when its just outside the car in places where it works to unlock the car. Once the engine is started you can drive the car, and for safety it won't cut out if you take the key fob away. However, if you stop somewhere, like the traffic lights, the engine can cut and not restart without the key fob being present.It seems they try to use the metalwork of the car's body to isolate some of the radio signals around the car to a reasonable extent. For example, my car can use my phone set to wifi hotspot to access the internet while I am driving. However, it can't use the phone when its right outside the car. I can only get the car to connect to our home wifi by having a wifi router positioned to shine down through the windscreen at about 45 degrees when the car is parked under our car port. This kind of isolation is nice for day to day use, but it useless for isolating against criminal attacks.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2019, 09:14:41 pm
content: Just a quick note about NFC. Any wireless link that works at more than a few cm definitely isn't, by definition, NFC. The key systems that work up to 1m or so are not NFC, they are usually either 433/868MHz RF links, or RFID, but not strictly NFC, which is meant for much shorter ranges.If your car key allows to start the car just by sitting anywhere inside the car - then it's definitely not NFC, strictly speaking.Solutions that would still be based on 'NFC' links but with an extended range are completely against the spirit of NFC, and are actually just plain RFID. And conversely, it's really not hard to design an NFC link that only works up to a few mm only. I consider those much safer as they require ultra close proximity to work, making a whole range of hacking attempts worthless.The first generation of "contactless" ignition keys were very short range stuff (similar to NFC) and a lot less brain-dead idea. There are fortunately still recent cars that use similar keys. But any key that works up to 1m - no thanks.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2019, 09:21:01 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on November 15, 2019, 09:14:41 pmThe near field is quite large for 125kHz systems. However, most of the keyless entry systems for cars have a battery in the key, so they are not passive NFC responders. With our car we got 2 ordinary keys, with buttons to control the locks on the car, and a completely sealed key you can take swimming. When the battery dies in the sealed key it is not user replaceable, and a replacement key costs a fortune. Isn't technology wonderful?

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2019, 09:27:13 pm
content: Again, it's not NFC then, it's plain RFID.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near-field_communication

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2019, 10:05:59 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on November 15, 2019, 04:01:41 pmThe keyless entry systems open up possibilities for whole new categories of stupid mistakes that were not possible before. E.g. the BMW owner that drops his wife off at the shopping center, drives to work, and on attempting to drive home... realizes his wife has the key...

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2019, 11:01:28 pm
content: Quote from: SilverSolder on November 15, 2019, 10:05:59 pmAh yes, that too!

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2019, 04:15:22 am
content: Quote from: janoc on November 15, 2019, 04:01:41 pmAgreed. I happen tolikephysically inserting a key, turning it, and feeling the engine roar to life. Pushing a button (and one that might not even start an engine, or start an engine you can't even feel running)? That's a toy car......then again, I prefer cars that sound like this:

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2019, 10:17:47 am
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on November 15, 2019, 09:14:41 pmThe problem is that those "few mm" is not something you can actually enforce if you have no control of the antenna on the other side. That's why these systems are vulnerable to attacks like the SARA. Even a system where you normally need to literally press the fob against the reader or it won't register can be spoofed with an antenna sufficiently large (and with a large gain) and an adequate transmitter (likely illegal but crooks are unlikely to care about that). Again, all this is well known and has been demonstrated many times.Whether the attack like that is practical or not depends a lot on what is it used for. Stealing passport data? Likely not - running around with a yagi pointed towards crowds of people would certainly attract unwanted attention. Stealing a car? Heck yeah - takes a few minutes tops and well worth it for the crooks.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2019, 05:31:48 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on November 16, 2019, 10:17:47 amProbably true in the very general case, but I can assure you that it's definitely possible to enforce reasonably (of course the 100% unhackable doesn't exist!) if you design with the right parameters.I've worked with NFC a bit so I have experimented quite a few things. For instance, the NFC standard allows data speed up to 424kb/s, but some NFC interface ICs allow to use up to 848kb/s (and sometimes higher.) I can guarantee you that, given how NFC (like RFID, basically with load modulation/backscattering) works, if you choose to communicate at the highest speed possible while still being reliable at a few mm (848kb/s, in my experience, was the sweet spot), even with very advanced techniques, it would be almost impossible to communicate with the tag and/or reader at over just a few mm, 1cm TOP. Try to pull off doing it reliably at larger distances! The BER just becomes impossibly large to deal with whatever you do at high speeds; load modulation is a bitch.Of course at the lower speeds, it's a lot easier to do, and I believe most RFID car keys are, as I said, not really NFC but just RFID, and actually communicate with the reader at the lowest speed possible (which in turn makes it a bit more robust but a lot easier to hack from a distance.)Just a few thoughts. I'll never say "never", of course, but I can assure you that at high speeds, it's an order of magnitude (or more) more difficult that anything that has been attempted this far for the existing keys.

author: Yansi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2019, 05:39:10 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on November 15, 2019, 09:14:41 pmKeyless entry systems are in fact RFID at 125kHz.RF (315/432/868/915) is NOT part of the keyless entry, it is there just for authentication, only unidirectional transmission.//EDIT: Antitheft systems in many (if not most) book libraries, where you go through that frames near the doors, are in fact also NFC, at 13.56MHz. ISO/IEC 15693 (vicinity cards) if I am not mistaken. This can work a meter well.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2019, 07:30:21 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on November 16, 2019, 05:31:48 pmThe problem is that such system would be completely pointless as a keyless entry/start system for a car. The entire idea of that is that you don't have to touch or insert anything anywhere (otherwise you can as well use the key, both to unlock the door and to start the engine). So the system has to work at at least a meter or two of distance while you are approaching the vehicle, with the fob in your pocket. That rules out a scheme like what you are describing.And once the thief is in the car, it is game over, even if you have some sort of immobilizer requiring that the fob is placed in some very specific spot. The thieves know how bypass/disable similar things in seconds, even going as far as using the OBDII ports with custom programming dongles and a laptop ... Of course, they could do the same by breaking a window or a door lock but spoofing the fob is faster, less noisy and doesn't attract unwanted attention like a broken window would.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2019, 07:54:00 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on November 16, 2019, 07:30:21 pmNope. First, there is a difference between entering the car and starting it, and I think this difference should remain effective. To this day, it's even a very common approach for car makers: the part that unlocks the doors is separate from the part that serves as an ignition key. The former is often still an RF remote, while the latter is now usually some kind of RFID. This is changing for some newer models/makers, but this change is not a smart one IMO. That the car unlocks just because I'm approaching it, without any action from my part, no thanks. It's completely stupid, and can be unsafe in some areas.The benefit or having a keyless ignition system, IMO, are significant even when you need to put your "key" in some specific spot (again many recent cars with contactless ignition keys still work like this). Not requiring a physical key and lock is a nice feature to me, and was, as I said, the approach in the first generation of "keyless" cars. As a customer, I like the smaller keys (I've always found car keys big and clunky), and the absence of mechanical lock makes for more reliable stuff AND avoids the typical case in which robbers will just put a screwdriver in it (even when the car can't possibly be started doing this, the fuckers will still just try, not all car robbers have PhDs). The days when you'd find your ignition key lock destroyed (which was expensive to replace and sometimes you even had to replace the whole direction column) are over thanks to this.The introduction of key systems (again, especially for ignition keys) that worked just being inside, or close to the car, is a brain-dead move. I don't care about those in the least. That may look nice for a second, but the drawbacks are just too many.And again no, contactless systems that only work at a very close distance are definitely not useless IMO. They solve many problems as said above. The rest is just marketing wank (and as SilverSolder noted, can make for very stupid situtations.)

author: Ian.M
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2019, 08:03:45 pm
content: Its inexcusable that unlocking the vehicle doesn't require user interaction with the 'key' fob, either when you approach the vehicle or set in advance to work *ONCE* with the fob in your pocket to allow unlocking the vehicle when you approach with your hands full of packages.That would protect against SARA attacks as without user intervention the fob would ignore the handshake from the car.It would be a relatively cheap upgrade or recall for vulnerable vehicles as all that would be required would be to replace the vulnerable fobs and destroy them.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2019, 08:07:33 pm
content: Quote from: Ian.M on November 16, 2019, 08:03:45 pmYes - and it would quite defeat the entire selling point of the system. If you need to interact with something (or remember to enable something before you leave the car), you may as well use a classic battery powered fob with buttons ...

author: Gyro
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2019, 08:12:31 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on November 16, 2019, 08:07:33 pmHey, anything that prevents the paint scratches that you used to get around the keyhole in the driver's door is good enough for me!

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2019, 08:51:49 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on November 16, 2019, 08:07:33 pmThat's probably the solution, right there!Perhaps make the fob itself easier to use, if pressing a button is too much like hard work for some... maybe the fob can detect it is close to the car and "click itself"... or it could be voice activated... etc.

author: m98
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 27, 2019, 09:05:56 pm
content: To everyone complaining how unsafe modern electromechanical locks are, ever heard of lockpicking? Even the least secure Bluetooth-doorlock will take more time to hack than the ~20 seconds it takes your average burgular to open a good Lock.

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 27, 2019, 10:21:38 pm
content: It would be interesting to see anyone break one of these in 20 seconds or less, without making a terrible racket:

author: Bruce Abbott
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2019, 02:20:54 am
content: Quote from: SilverSolder on November 15, 2019, 03:25:55 pmYeah right. On my last car I could unlock the driver's side door with the key only half inserted. I could unlock my previous car with a steel ruler in under 10 seconds. Anyone who thinks mechanical car locks are secure is an idiot.One of my cars was broken into 3 times, using nothing more high-tech than a rock. Thieves broke into my house twice in two consecutive months, using a jemmy bar. The shop I worked in had a thick steel bar across the inside of the front doors. Thieves broke in by stealing a car and ramming it through the doors (the alarm went off of course, but all the neighbours were apparently deaf). Previously I owned a shop that was broken into 10 times - the cops caught one perp while he was trying to smash a 44 gallon drum through the window.The answer to crime is to crack down on criminal behavior, not make our lives even more inconvenient because crooks can get around reasonable security measures. Of course keyless entry systems should be secure, but if the prize is big enough criminals will always find a way to defeat them. That is not the user's or manufacturer's fault.NII Facts + Statistics: Auto theftQuote

author: m98
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2019, 10:20:34 am
content: Quote from: SilverSolder on November 27, 2019, 10:21:38 pmHave you looked at the actual locking mechanism of that contraption? Useless. The opening time of this thing will be close to 2 seconds, not 20.

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2019, 05:02:28 pm
content: Quote from: m98 on November 28, 2019, 10:20:34 amI have direct experience with the Disklok... Three attempts to steal my car were thwarted by it. In all cases, the would-be thieves ended up making enough noise to wake me up, so I could chase them away. The lock is recessed behind thick metal and is serious. A bolt cutter is no good to you because you can't get a grip on anything. You won't get that thing off without an angle grinder - or the key!The thieves did not find the door locks to be a challenge (broken up with a screwdriver), and they wouldn't have found the standard ignition lock much of a challenge either.After the third attempt, I never had any further theft attempts on any of my vehicles when using a Disklok.It is a little inconvenient to use it, but it solves the problem.... the thieves go looking for something easier to steal.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2019, 08:25:26 pm
content: Quote from: m98 on November 27, 2019, 09:05:56 pmI think you would be very badly mistaken. Lot of these electronic locks (Bluetooth or not) are ridiculously insecure, vulnerable to basic things such as a strong magnet placed in a strategic place or a thief having a screwdriver and popping the cover off. Or the application/web interface can be easily hacked and the lock even opened remotely (e.g. Tesla had such vulnerability).That something has a fancy-schmancy smartphone interface doesn't mean the manufacturer has any clue about what they are doing and the gizmo is actually secure.The "Lockpicking Lawyer" guy on Youtube has plenty of videos showing how ridiculously bad 99% of these products are.(https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCm9K6rby98W8JigLoZOh6FQ)And this thread is a case in the point - it was about abusing a design flaw inherent to the wireless keyless entry system (door lock) on a car. Picking a classic car door lock would certainly take longer, be more destructive and wouldn't allow you to actually start the car and drive off with it. So much for the electronics ...

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2019, 08:34:43 pm
content: Quote from: amateur_25 on November 15, 2019, 02:07:53 pmI'm surprised they didn't spend the cents worth of die area and the <100k$ of developer/consultant fees to do a distance measurement. I've been saying this for years.It almost can't be an unintentional design flaw, anyone working on it and spending more than a couple minutes thinking of the problem domain will have realised the vulnerability ... anyone who knows how bloody cheap and fast even the lowliest process transistors are, should also decide that design cost was the relevant impediment for fixing it. Still, the penny pinchers left it wide open.Or maybe I'm just underestimating how myopic most engineers are.PS. unless patent licensing made the cost of fixing it prohibitive I guess, there is always that option.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2019, 10:07:27 pm
content: Quote from: Marco on November 28, 2019, 08:34:43 pmDistance measurement is not going to work in an application where you have noise, the fob may not react immediately (e.g. because of interference) and the distances this is supposed to work at are a few meters at least (unlike the typical security-related RFID applications which are at a few centimeters tops).The difference between an "organic" and "extended" connection would be a few nanoseconds max. E.g. 10m difference is just 30ns and most attacks won't even need to extend the range that far. How are you going to reliably measure this without a ton of false positives and the buyer smashing you the seemingly unreliable fob in the face? Or you make the window where the signal is valid so large that it stops rejecting the valid fobs - and the check becomes useless.Also, the response times of the typical RFID tags/chips are tens of microseconds - that's3 orders of magnitudemore than the time difference caused by extending the range in realistic conditions.This is just putting a lipstick on a pig and not a solution.

author: m98
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2019, 11:43:43 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on November 28, 2019, 08:25:26 pmNothing new, especially the mechanical security flaws are also present in purely mechanical locks. Look up shimming, core bypassing, raking, …And those can be taken advantage of without any skill required. You literally can't even buy a reasonably safe padlock (one that couldn't be non-destructively opened by an amateur in a minute) in most hardware stores.Quote from: janoc on November 28, 2019, 08:25:26 pmHe shows that basically any lock is ridiculously bad at resisting a skilled attacker for any notable amount of time. Lockpicking also leaves no trace.

author: m98
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2019, 12:13:37 am
content: Quote from: janoc on November 28, 2019, 10:07:27 pmOf cause this isn't going to work with regular active RFID transponders, but if a car manufacturer was serious enough to develop a custom solution, there are ways to make that work.Two-Way-Ranging using DSSS modulation, for example. Works reliably even in a multipath-environment, and is possible to implement in an RF-SoC.

author: AlfBaz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2019, 12:20:13 am
content: This may have been suggested but instead of placing your keys in a bowl when inside place them in a tin can.If you are going out and don't want to carry the tin can with you buy one of the rfid shield slips you can get for credit cards and stick the FOB in that.We own one of these keyless cars and not having an empty tin can around, just now I wrapped the FOB with foil, walked up to the car and presto, nothing.Who new, if you are paranoid about something tin foil will save the day

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2019, 12:24:44 am
content: Quote from: amyk on November 16, 2019, 04:15:22 amActual race cars are toy cars? I guess that's one way to look at them.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2019, 12:33:24 am
content: Quote from: AlfBaz on November 29, 2019, 12:20:13 amIf I walk into our house and put the key for my car on the shelf in the hall, someone can walk up to the car and open it. The car sits under a car-port the other side of the hall wall, so its less that a metre from the car, separated by a double glazed window. When I open the tailgate the key is further from the radio equipment in the car than when the key is on the shelf in the hall. Whatever clever distance and direction checking might be put into future keyless hardware, there's really no getting away from issues like this. People need to understand the quirks of the equipment, and take appropriate action.

author: AlfBaz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2019, 01:03:00 am
content: Quote from: coppice on November 29, 2019, 12:33:24 amIndeed.Maybe my wife and I are old school and don't explicitly trust any new technology out of the box but when we purchased the car the first thing we did is ensure the car was locked with the keys inside.Having said that we have found a flaw in this stupid system. When you close the door the car beeps to indicate it recognizesalldoors are closed and as you walk away it beeps again to indicate the car is locked. If, however, you close the door and walk away too quickly no beeps are sounded and the car remains unlocked. We've tested this several times and it is absolutely repeatable and no, it doesn't lock after a period of time with the FOB out of range.

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2019, 02:46:40 am
content: It's almost more trouble dealing with the "personalities" of the modern locking systems than it is to deal with the previous generation transponder keys...

author: rgarito
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 30, 2019, 05:20:49 am
content: The key vs RFID/pushbutton thing, I believe, mostly gained momentum after in the USA, there was mass panic because GM had a couple of car accidents in which SUPPOSEDLY the airbags didn't deploy because the key in the ignition turned off during the crash. The theory (IMHO a long shot) was that the keychain and all of the crap hanging from the driver's key acted as a sort of pendulum causing the key to rotate. When the ignition turned off, the power to the airbags was disabled, so the airbags didn't deploy. Apparently it killed a few people.Once that happened, GM had a massive recall, thinking that ignition locks had a spring in them that was out-of-spec which allowed this to be easier to happen. They replaced every GM ignition lock cylinder and every ignition key. My car and several of those of family members were involved. The media here was all over it, of course, with lots of scaremongering.Shortly after that, ignition keys disappeared from all GM cars and many other manufacturers followed. No key=nothing to rotate and turn off during an accident?More info:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_ignition_switch_recalls

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 04, 2019, 08:14:48 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on November 29, 2019, 12:33:24 amGetting away from it is easy. Just forget about keyless entry which simplifies an already simple process but adds physical key management. Putting a key in a tin and getting it out again is more of a hassle than just unlocking the car with a button or even a physical key.

author: SparkyFX
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2019, 08:38:32 am
content: A guy with a towing truck that looks halfway legit can steal your car in a matter of minutes. Even if the theft deterrent goes off no one will care.When such thefts are mostly for the parts and the used spare parts market the complicated theft protections don't matter much, as the source was "free" they can afford to throw unusable parts away.This is why a man in the middle attack is least of concern for most manufacturers.The newfangled data link might make it harder, but still not impossible.

author: asmi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2019, 11:07:23 pm
content: My car's keyless entry system is a bit more sophisticated as it can figure out where exactly the key is relative to the car. For starters, it doesn't auto-unlock anything as a approach the car. Also the only door that can be opened is the one that is near key (closer than ~1 m) - for example if I'm at the driver's door, other person can't open any other door until I open "my" door and thus unlock the car (unlock sensors are inside the handle, they are activated when you insert your hand into it). The system can also tell if a key is in the trunk - if I attempt to close it while key is inside, it will not lock the trunk door and will beep at me telling me that the car isn't locked. This saved me several times from locking myself out of my carThis keyless system deactivates itself after being stationary for a while to conserve battery, it reactivates when someone attempts to open a door.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 12:12:38 am
content: Quote from: asmi on December 18, 2019, 11:07:23 pmThat description is very similar to most of the keyless systems I've looked at. However, it only scratches the surface of making a secure system.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 07:26:39 am
content: Quote from: SilverSolder on November 15, 2019, 03:25:55 pmThat was my thought as well. My car is absolutely impervious to a SARA attack, the doors and ignition are purely electromechanical and the only radio receiver anywhere in the vehicle is in the stereo.I've driven cars with the keyless entry and keyless ignition and never really understood the appeal. The keyless entry can be marginally useful every now and then when my hands are full but I've spent more time fixing key fobs for people than I have saved using keyless entry. The keyless ignition is just completely stupid, never once in my life have I felt that pulling a key out of my pocket and placing it in the ignition was any sort of burden. A friend of mine has a car with one of those stupid keyless ignition things and he got stranded after dropping off his wife and going somewhere else. She had the key in her purse and the car kept running until he shut it off many miles from the key! A friend and I rented a car with it once in LA and we accidentally left the car running while we were in a restaurant having lunch. Neither of us heard the engine idling over the background din of the city.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 07:30:06 am
content: Quote from: janoc on November 28, 2019, 08:25:26 pmI don't think I've ever heard of a garden variety thief picking a lock, it's much harder and more tedious than it is in the movies. Real life thieves nearly always use the brute force approach, bust a window to get in and punch the ignition with a screwdriver, it's much MUCH faster than picking a lock and requires much less skill.

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 11:47:02 am
content: Quote from: james_s on December 19, 2019, 07:30:06 amFirst of all,  thieves do not break glass due to the risk of cutting and leaving DNA. Newer cars are made of very light metal so a screwdriver into the lock can often pop the buttons.Our private road service group (NRMA) has guys well versed in opening cars with keys locked inside. Coat hanger down the outside of the glass and pull up. They do it so fast you wonder if they moonlight.

author: SilverSolder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2019, 04:34:39 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on December 19, 2019, 07:26:39 amI also have friends that had the same experience as your friends - except in this case, the husband was dropped off by the wife, who then drove almost 50 miles away before the problem was discovered. My friend was not amused and did not buy the same make of car at trade-in time because of this "f*king stupid" design that obviously inconvenienced him millions of times more than using a mechanical key ever could.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2019, 03:39:18 am
content: Quote from: Ed.Kloonk on December 19, 2019, 11:47:02 amMost of the thieves breaking into cars around here are not smart by any stretch of the imagination. They'll smash your window with a rock to get the change out of your ashtray or swipe anything of value left sitting in the car. People looking to steal the cars are sometimes a bit more careful, usually they're stealing trucks, vans and SUVs they can use in burglaries and other crimes. Then of course there are the smaller groups of much smarter organized thieves stealing expensive late model cars but those are not as common.