I strolled in late every day this week, my boss don't give a f[moderated]. Well, that's more of a function of that my boss was at VMworld.

I've found that the higher up in the chain of support I go, the more lax it becomes for punching in a clock. When I was a lowly first level phone goon taking calls for Time Warner Cable, it was punctual to a fault. When I worked as a level 2 support goon for AT&T, it was punctual, but very flexible. When I became a system admin and started to run my own show, punctuality was not needed as much except for very specific reasons. When I went to the big red V, as a Level 1, I needed to be on time more often but they didn't care. When I moved up to Level 2, I was less and less required to be "on time" because my scope of work was by its nature dynamic. Now at my new job I am allowed to pretty much call my hours as the only Windows L3 guy I can justify my Spirit Airlines level of on-time response.

@scottalanmiller said:

@MattSpeller said:

@PSX_Defector said:

The FCC is brutally efficient in sniffing out this kind of stuff.

Really? I'm not so sure about that. I've read about and done some very ... sketchy home brew stuff. Unless they have vans driving around town ala WW2 nazi hunter style I don't see them finding you. In fact, I'd put a strong argument up for that being the reason for this silly regulation.

Yup, the FCC vans are famous and are one of the government agencies for which there is no need for a warrant for search and seizure.

It's more analogous to shouting at the top of your lungs for everyone to hear your nefarious deeds. The fact that radio emissions are flooding the airwaves is enough probable cause for the FCC to get involved just as if a cop heard someone screaming from inside your house.

Since radio has had 100+ years of history behind it, the laws are shaped well because the technology is well understood. That's why it's generally illegal at the moment to drive around with an infrared camera pointed at houses looking for heavy duty heat signatures without a warrant but using a wireless scanner is not.

@MattSpeller said:

@PSX_Defector said:

They actually do have those vans.

color me suprised I suppose

I know you are more used to the 4chan party van.

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/4chan-party-van

@MattSpeller said:

@PSX_Defector said:

The FCC is brutally efficient in sniffing out this kind of stuff.

Really? I'm not so sure about that. I've read about and done some very ... sketchy home brew stuff. Unless they have vans driving around town ala WW2 nazi hunter style I don't see them finding you. In fact, I'd put a strong argument up for that being the reason for this silly regulation.

They actually do have those vans. They take reports of unlicensed spectrum broadcasting very seriously, and radio operators will know when you are broadcasting where you shouldn't and report you very quickly. When I didn't have a license, I would do sketchy stuff. Ever since I got one back in 1997, I've never strayed from what I broadcast out unless I know I can get away with it. Channel 14 on 500mW won't get very far unless the FCC Party Van is parked right next to the house.

Keeping it under a watt should keep most people unaware, as at that power it won't get very far outside your own home. It's the fucknuts who blast at 5W+, which you can get close to with some of the third party firmware gear. And if they are not clean with their wave, it can spill into other channels and critical services. The 5Ghz is pretty narrow with a lot of licensed frequency next to it. That's what the FCC is trying to keep clean.

@JaredBusch said:

@Dashrender said:

I wonder how badly speeds are affected by running ring tone down the same cable as ethernet?

Fast Ethernet only ever uses 2 pair. So really nothing too bad here.

And we are talking about 2v on hook. This isn't much in the grand scheme of things. If it's standard telephone, off hook would be 50v to hold the circuit open. And that's if it was coming from a central office on a POTS line. On a PBX, the voltage to hold a line open is considerably smaller.

If someone was using flat 8 strand to run their ethernet along with a POTS line to the endpoint, perhaps there would be a problem.

You mean I can't use the Japanese frequencies anymore for the 5Ghz band?

Just as Scott was saying, this doesn't impact third party firmware, it impact the ability for third party firmware writers to go "Now don't use this frequencies if you are in the US"

Same problem with 802.11b congestion caused me to flip to channel 14 for a while. I had gear that could do it, and I had endpoints that would support it. Since I kept my radios under 1W, most folks wouldn't know I was using it. Now if I started to pump the power out to 2W or more with that, then the FCC can come ahead and bust my ass and rightly so. Don't spew crap over the airwaves. The FCC is brutally efficient in sniffing out this kind of stuff.

@johnhooks said:

Piggy backing on one of the other threads. If it was an insider, how do you think the FTC would have grounds to sue? I don't think there is a way to stop something like this unless no employees have access to the data.

Be kind of hard for the FTC to sue a Canadian company.

Eh, have a few cars. Currently have a Cadillac CTS, a Ford Ranger, and soon to join my menagerie, a 2004 Dodge Ram 1500.

Thinking about getting a new daily driver to replace the CTS. Been eyeing up something stupid fast, but might have to give up and get me a Corvette. Maybe a CTS-V, wind up pulling a @JaredBusch.

I just got a room at the no tell motel that I said I would never stay at again. Oh well, cheapest place in Austin at the moment. Holy crap prices for that weekend are insane.

Another line that makes me not believe their shit as much.

"Then he locates a Dodge Durango, moving along a rural road somewhere in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan."

They are claiming that they were able to remotely discover systems all around the country. The UConnect system uses Sprint's network to connect. And that these cell connections are all using public facing IPs.

The U.P. is a practical dead zone of most providers, especially Sprint. Verizon owns most of the area, which still has large swaths of dead zones, bad connections, and various other stuff. Sprint only shows roaming for the U.P., both voice and data. The maps don't do it justice though, you can drive from Marquette to Ishpeming and lose connection for a brief amount of time. And even if you do get connection, it's usually on the 3G network.

So they were able to scan a foreign network for cars and were able to figure out that these devices were on the VZ and/or US Celluar network? I don't think so.

@MattSpeller said:

@PSX_Defector said:

I'm holding out on better proof because fantastical claims require fantastical proof.

I'm much less confident than you are that all of this is separate systems.

Again, this is Fiat Chrysler. Fix it again Tony and Chrysler being so bad they don't even need to have a funny acronym. The Cherokee is based on an Alfa Romeo design. Faith is the only thing holding it together anyways.

@david.wiese said:

what about the cars that have wipers with the fluid detector sensor on the windshield to automatically activate the wipers? On newer vw's, and nissans this is pretty well standard. They have a sensor that mounts to the windshield on the inside and somehow detects fluid being on the windshield, when it detects fluid, it signals the wipers to activate, therefore giving the hackers a way to control them.

Rain sensing wipers, like you see on most cars, are still activated by the switch on the stalk. You have to turn on the wipers to allow it to start wiping automatically.

The sensor itself is just a simple light resistance switch. The longer light is bent against the sensor, the more it assumes that it's raining harder so it adjusts speed.

@MattSpeller said:

@scottalanmiller @Dashrender

Transmission is computer controlled. Normally wipers are purely electro-mechanical. Like the steering.

All of the things are computer controlled!

All things have a computer, doesn't mean all things are controlled by some Skynet-esque all knowing machine.

Transmission and engine data go through OBDII, it's the jack you see under the console that you can plug into. Onstar and the like use some of this to get the data they are looking for.

So if someone jacked into the OBDII interface and cross linked it to the infotainment system which then has the ability to be busted into that's just bad design. And easily fixed. This also cannot change the fact that transmission and steering are NOT linked into ODBII like that. Steering reports a position from center, but again it's physically impossible to screw with it like that through the interface because it's physically impossible. You can't even lock the wheel because that is when the system is at specific states in the starter. And transmission? Unless they are using some kind of shift-by-wire there is always a cable between the lever and the transmission and the ever present safety buttons. They can maybe pop it into neutral but you have to physically push the button to move it to anything other than that. That's an NTSB rule, which most countries follow anyways. And a stick wouldn't have the ability to do that ever.

We have to keep in mind this is a $25K truck. And this is Fiat Chrysler, not known for their electrical prowess.

I'm reminded of the whole Y2K panic with the news reporting some fat white chick poking at a TV and toaster saying "It's got a computer, we don't know if it's Y2K compliant!". Yeah, there is potential for hacking into this info if someone was stupid enough to do that, but like the airplane WiFi "hack", I'm holding out on better proof because fantastical claims require fantastical proof. And wiper control tells me that someone is making shit up.

@Dashrender said:

@PSX_Defector said:

Calling bullshit.

"Then the windshield wipers turned on, and wiper fluid blurred the glass"

That's on the stalk, using a switch.

If the switch is just a soft switch, you could still trigger it with software, think about the power button on your PC.

It's usually a relay that controls that, especially the actual wiper controls. That's a circuit open/close. Mind you, I don't have a Jeep Cherokee to rip apart, but wipers that can be controlled outside of the driver's ability, really anything in the driver's purview, would be really, really badly designed. And it might run afowl of NTSB specs, because anything that can be done through this can be done by non-drivers. Imagine your dickhead friend next to you poking on the center console and changing the speed of cruise control and turning on the wipers.

I'm just calling bullshit on that part. The rest, like AC and radio, I can see happening, but I would need to see more proof from someone else just because of the wiper comment.

Calling bullshit.

"Then the windshield wipers turned on, and wiper fluid blurred the glass"

That's on the stalk, using a switch.

Youtube Video

@scottalanmiller said:

@thecreativeone91 said:

Around here they are near Virginia Tech and offer very low paying jobs so some of the poor support is expected.

They famously pay way, way under market in San Antonio. Pretty much anyone good working there can move on almost instantly making for high churn and the top 50% of the company attritioning out year over year.

Guess I should be glad they didn't call me back when I was shitcanned from the big red V. They were opening up a datacenter in Grapevine and were looking for Windows support goons.

Although it's kind of nice getting poached by another provider in the industry.

@thecreativeone91 said:

@PSX_Defector said:

@thecreativeone91 said:

@Carnival-Boy said:

Really tempted to go back to ISDN - I never had a problem in 20 years of service!

Most ISDNs are sip with a PRI handoff instead of keeping it SIP at the handoff. Same Technology on the back end anymore.

???

I don't know of any telco company doing IP like that. ISDN from BT is the same PRI signaling that they have done for decades. AT&T does standard framing for PRI so all you need to do is plug in your TA and go to town.

AT&T's U-Verse product is pure IP, but does fall into a different category of service versus a PRI. On the wireless side of things, there was some stuff being done pure IP on WiMax with Clearwire, but that's mostly because they were a data focused company.

We have about 10 locations with analog phone systems still. All are on either CentruyLink or AT&T PRIs. they all just go through a converter over the fiber now days to do a PRI handoff instead of SIP.

A little different.

https://www.digium.com/products/voip-gateways/g100

It's SIP all the way to you, it's just using a converter to integrate into your old school PBX as a requirement. Nothing is stopping you from going pure SIP on it, just gotta have the right equipment.

A PRI straight from the central office is never gonna use framing like this.

@thecreativeone91 said:

@Carnival-Boy said:

Really tempted to go back to ISDN - I never had a problem in 20 years of service!

Most ISDNs are sip with a PRI handoff instead of keeping it SIP at the handoff. Same Technology on the back end anymore.

???

I don't know of any telco company doing IP like that. ISDN from BT is the same PRI signaling that they have done for decades. AT&T does standard framing for PRI so all you need to do is plug in your TA and go to town.

AT&T's U-Verse product is pure IP, but does fall into a different category of service versus a PRI. On the wireless side of things, there was some stuff being done pure IP on WiMax with Clearwire, but that's mostly because they were a data focused company.