Sponsored
4G Modem Disabling Instructions:
- Thread starter drummerboy
- Start date
- Watchers 101
OP
OP
drummerboy
Well-Known Member
- Thread starter
- #182
That is absolutely a fair and wonderful point.
Pulling the fuse is equivalent to removing the modem anyway, though, so I'll be disconnecting it just for good measure
I have my own way to track the car.
CrowsHeadSoup
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2021
- Threads
- 2
- Messages
- 35
- Reaction score
- 73
- Location
- Southern Indiana
- First Name
- Peter
- Vehicle(s)
- 2020 GT350
I thought of that, but more than likely, anyone stealing a GT350 would know to pull the fuse. In no way do I mean to imply thieves are intelligent. They may be considered resourceful, however, and hanging out a forums like this to learn what they can.God forbid your car gets stolen, you can tell police exactly where your stolen car is.(Or you cannot, and take care of the thiefs yourselfs.)
Sponsored
johnto
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2021
- Threads
- 0
- Messages
- 3
- Reaction score
- 4
- Location
- Toronto, ON, Canada
- First Name
- John
- Vehicle(s)
- 21 Ford Mustang GT PP
Like some others, I lost most of my interest in new cars due to the tracking and overuse of electronics doomed to become expensive repairs. The tracking was really my number 1 issue and when I found this thread it was enough for me to go ahead and pull the trigger (shortly followed by the fuse).
As someone else brought up, the potential for the car to store or cache data which can then be uploaded if the fuse was reinstalled or during service is still a bit of a concern. However, I recently discovered that manufacturers are now using bluetooth to create mesh networks which allow devices (in our case our cars) to relay information between them. A simple software update will increase the range of bluetooth to a half mile. So mother Ford can, if so motivated to exploit this capability, transmit your data to another Ford vehicle that can then, if the modem is enabled, upload to the mothership.
If you want more info on this goto 10:24 of this youtube video
Hoping some of the ingenious folks here can formulate (or have formulated) a counter to this potential work around by Ford.
As someone else brought up, the potential for the car to store or cache data which can then be uploaded if the fuse was reinstalled or during service is still a bit of a concern. However, I recently discovered that manufacturers are now using bluetooth to create mesh networks which allow devices (in our case our cars) to relay information between them. A simple software update will increase the range of bluetooth to a half mile. So mother Ford can, if so motivated to exploit this capability, transmit your data to another Ford vehicle that can then, if the modem is enabled, upload to the mothership.
If you want more info on this goto 10:24 of this youtube video
Hoping some of the ingenious folks here can formulate (or have formulated) a counter to this potential work around by Ford.
Last edited:
CrowsHeadSoup
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2021
- Threads
- 2
- Messages
- 35
- Reaction score
- 73
- Location
- Southern Indiana
- First Name
- Peter
- Vehicle(s)
- 2020 GT350
Best to assume they do and act from there.
Thanks for the video.
dx2
Well-Known Member
He might have good intentions with the video message but he mixes some uncertainties with technical facts together and you know what this will lead to with a non-rf-software-security educated audience which probably cannot distinguish what is what.
Most of what he says is right but quite mixed together and hard to get if you are not familiar with the terms and techologies involved. The general distrust towards the mix of new tech and modern data-collect-attempts is warranted just do not get overly paranoid without understanding the technology.
I just want to say a bit abound mesh networks.
He mentions half a mile radio coverage: That is a bit of exaggeration. That might happen under directly line of sight and in good weather conditions. Usually you have obstacles in densely populated areas. A coherent mesh network could be spanned there but the coverage is a few feet.
A mesh network can, given the right modulation and RF setup, relay packets through home devices spanning multiple homes if the device network is dense enough.
Stationary devices, like TVs, which are wifi internet connected, would be used as relays to gather information about surrounding not-internet-connected node devices. But in general most devices have wifi, and these devices have coverage already, no need for a mesh. Even the smart city devices (smart city lights).
Zigbee, Thread and BT mesh are all different protocols and these are not compatible among each other.
Mesh networks have the big disadvantage of not being able to transmit a lot of data because otherwise they get congested very quick, also the amount of device participating in a mesh is practically limited by this constraint. Imagine a traffic jam.
In mesh networks, devices have to be part of a network, commissioned with an app-key, traffic will be encrypted. other devices just cannot hop in and get the data without being allowed before. As he correctly explains the the concept TTL, what he does not mention is that a message must be decrypted, and re-encrypted to modify this value.
Random devices being part of different networks will not relay messages or else you could easily attack a network by spamming it and render it inoperative.
So the mesh devices will be either all be manipulated by an attacker, which is unlikely or normally be part of the same network, also unlikely. Not sure what the point is for relaying location information of mobile devices through mesh networks for the purpose of spying, these devices are cellular connected anyway.
LoRa as a radio modulation is quite robust again interference and is capable or achieving very long range but it is not widespread in use. It is also mostly applied in combination with LoRaWAN which is an open source LPWAN standard and it is not a mesh but a star topology network. lora as rf modulation can be used to build a mesh protocol similar to the other three mentioned above but there is no such standard.
tracking the devices and thus persons and objects is kind of unavoidable. This is independent of mesh networks.
One way to avoid arbitrary software to be installed on devices is to use means of cryptography by digitally signing the software update.
Only these with a known and valid signature will be accepted by the device so attackers have a very hard way infiltrating mesh networks.
But the devices must be set up to behave securely like this and not all are, especially not older ones.
An example of this technique is already done for example by Ford with the Sync Software.
If you try to modify the update, it will be rejected and not installed, you can try and verify this yourself on the Mustang.
There are state authorities which make sure that certain security features are provided in devices.
Getting a certified device will guarantee that the device was tested and there are no security short comings. To prevent device manufacturers from doing whatever they want, we probably need new laws to disallow malpractice.
Eventually what you wanna do as a counter measure depends on what damage you are willing to accept in case it happens.
I like how he explains possibilities for jamming just for completeness. Just be sure arbitrary jamming frequencies does more harm then it will help. If you have stuff worth hiding, don't use wireless at all. Essentially I share his message about not blindly trusting others.
Devices will not blindly forward any kind of foreign data it receives.
I say mesh networks are not malevolent in nature or not designed to promote tracking/spying/monitoring people.
They can be used in helpful and useful ways without all the spy stuff but it depends who you will share the data with. A completely local mesh under your control that is not connected to the internet at home is fine.
Most of what he says is right but quite mixed together and hard to get if you are not familiar with the terms and techologies involved. The general distrust towards the mix of new tech and modern data-collect-attempts is warranted just do not get overly paranoid without understanding the technology.
I just want to say a bit abound mesh networks.
He mentions half a mile radio coverage: That is a bit of exaggeration. That might happen under directly line of sight and in good weather conditions. Usually you have obstacles in densely populated areas. A coherent mesh network could be spanned there but the coverage is a few feet.
A mesh network can, given the right modulation and RF setup, relay packets through home devices spanning multiple homes if the device network is dense enough.
Stationary devices, like TVs, which are wifi internet connected, would be used as relays to gather information about surrounding not-internet-connected node devices. But in general most devices have wifi, and these devices have coverage already, no need for a mesh. Even the smart city devices (smart city lights).
Zigbee, Thread and BT mesh are all different protocols and these are not compatible among each other.
Mesh networks have the big disadvantage of not being able to transmit a lot of data because otherwise they get congested very quick, also the amount of device participating in a mesh is practically limited by this constraint. Imagine a traffic jam.
In mesh networks, devices have to be part of a network, commissioned with an app-key, traffic will be encrypted. other devices just cannot hop in and get the data without being allowed before. As he correctly explains the the concept TTL, what he does not mention is that a message must be decrypted, and re-encrypted to modify this value.
Random devices being part of different networks will not relay messages or else you could easily attack a network by spamming it and render it inoperative.
So the mesh devices will be either all be manipulated by an attacker, which is unlikely or normally be part of the same network, also unlikely. Not sure what the point is for relaying location information of mobile devices through mesh networks for the purpose of spying, these devices are cellular connected anyway.
LoRa as a radio modulation is quite robust again interference and is capable or achieving very long range but it is not widespread in use. It is also mostly applied in combination with LoRaWAN which is an open source LPWAN standard and it is not a mesh but a star topology network. lora as rf modulation can be used to build a mesh protocol similar to the other three mentioned above but there is no such standard.
tracking the devices and thus persons and objects is kind of unavoidable. This is independent of mesh networks.
One way to avoid arbitrary software to be installed on devices is to use means of cryptography by digitally signing the software update.
Only these with a known and valid signature will be accepted by the device so attackers have a very hard way infiltrating mesh networks.
But the devices must be set up to behave securely like this and not all are, especially not older ones.
An example of this technique is already done for example by Ford with the Sync Software.
If you try to modify the update, it will be rejected and not installed, you can try and verify this yourself on the Mustang.
There are state authorities which make sure that certain security features are provided in devices.
Getting a certified device will guarantee that the device was tested and there are no security short comings. To prevent device manufacturers from doing whatever they want, we probably need new laws to disallow malpractice.
Eventually what you wanna do as a counter measure depends on what damage you are willing to accept in case it happens.
I like how he explains possibilities for jamming just for completeness. Just be sure arbitrary jamming frequencies does more harm then it will help. If you have stuff worth hiding, don't use wireless at all. Essentially I share his message about not blindly trusting others.
Devices will not blindly forward any kind of foreign data it receives.
I say mesh networks are not malevolent in nature or not designed to promote tracking/spying/monitoring people.
They can be used in helpful and useful ways without all the spy stuff but it depends who you will share the data with. A completely local mesh under your control that is not connected to the internet at home is fine.
velocity550
Well-Known Member
What a fucking legend Drummer is.
CJJon
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2020
- Threads
- 34
- Messages
- 3,508
- Reaction score
- 3,787
- Location
- Port Orchard
- Vehicle(s)
- 2020 Mustang GT/CS Convertible - Race Red
I installed a new LED floodlight the other day. When I flipped the switch for the first time a nearby bluetooth speaker came to life with a "Ready to Connect" announcement.
Sure enough, it was the light that was causing it. This is a cheap, non-IOT device (supposed to be anyway). Nowhere on the packaging or instructions does it mention BT.
Sure enough, it was the light that was causing it. This is a cheap, non-IOT device (supposed to be anyway). Nowhere on the packaging or instructions does it mention BT.
Sponsored
Rapid Red
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2019
- Threads
- 45
- Messages
- 5,049
- Reaction score
- 4,095
- Location
- Woodstock GA
- First Name
- Greg
- Vehicle(s)
- GT PP2 RaceRed Roush> Steeda> preformance
- Vehicle Showcase
- 2
That's what you get with plug & play ............ easy set up no admin work (control) required.
Tomster
Beware of idiots
All you have to do is locate the modem and pull the data/power harness. Done. Nothing is getting transmitted anywhere.
Tomster
Beware of idiots
Yes, 19 and 20s. So far on the single circuit. After what we have published, future models will be much more creative from a standpoint of defeat. As always, locating the modem and pulling the shared data/power harness is the best bet.
johnto
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2021
- Threads
- 0
- Messages
- 3
- Reaction score
- 4
- Location
- Toronto, ON, Canada
- First Name
- John
- Vehicle(s)
- 21 Ford Mustang GT PP
I appreciate the thoughtful and informative post and am certainly not equipped to debate the technical merits of the information.
I don't think it's possible to be paranoid given the lengths we know technology continues to be utilized and developed to gather information about us mostly with a profit motive in mind. I don't think it's practical (if even possible) for the average layperson to gain the level of understanding required to determine the potential threat of a particular technology given the breadth and depth and continuous innovation of the subject matter. For those that have the necessary background and aptitude, this makes perfect sense if they understand their own limitations.
For me I prefer to error on the side of caution. If it is possible it can transmit my data and I don't need or want it, I would prefer to disable it within practical limitations. Never going to prevent all of it but when there are simple steps to mitigate it, I am all for it. Like de-googled phones/unix phones, vpn routers, pulling the modem fuse etc...I am appreciative there are talented folks out there resisting it, some for profit some not. Recognizing due diligence is required to avoid a false sense of security or a scam. Not necessarily learning the technology sufficiently to make a call but relying on the consensus of experts proven to be reliable. You do the best you can if you care about it.
johnto
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2021
- Threads
- 0
- Messages
- 3
- Reaction score
- 4
- Location
- Toronto, ON, Canada
- First Name
- John
- Vehicle(s)
- 21 Ford Mustang GT PP
Thanks...but edumicate me...how does this disable the bluetooth radio?
Sponsored
