Andrew wrote:

Just a thought... if the thieves gain access by jamming the remote key fob signal, so that the car is not locked allowing them access, then why use the remote function? New models have touch sensitive unlock / lock facility, I am not able to confirm if MY 2010 on has this function, I'm sure lots of you will know, so if the car is locked in this way, they cannot intercept the remote signal......
I appreciate the OP states the alarm was set off so he had to disable by remote, but in the majority of situations the touch pad on the door handle could be used, it's how I lock mine, can someone with technical knowledge confirm this would help?

Andrew

Loving the tinted glasses you are wearing 1sttimer considering the tone of Mark Ns post before I had said a word. If you call it constructive then I guess we will have to disagree. Unlike MarkN I AM a RRS owner.

As Fkarim says its odd how some are so passionate when they don't even own one, I've previously suffered the experience of having my BMW stolen. Things happen, was just glad my family weren't put in any danger and it simply got stolen. Insurance did their job, got a new vehicle moved on.

Not a nice experience but this attitude that it's anyone but the theiving scum to blame is pretty silly. Harsher punishment for them is the real solution as no matter what technology comes in their will be someone who can hack / break / bypass it just like there has been since day 1.

Rangerover1sttimer, sorry I was not implying that you should have pressed the door switch, I appreciate the situation you were / are in.. I was saying it generally to all concerned that it may help the security issue  5.0 Ltr Superchrged RRS2, Chile Red, Sideways out of junctions!
TDV8 HST Stornaway on a 08.. remapped.. now gone and replaced, was a mighty fine car..
4.2 SC First Edition when they first came out, quick car!

No apology necessary I know you weren't directing it to me specifically...

Andrew wrote:

Just a thought... if the thieves gain access by jamming the remote key fob signal, so that the car is not locked allowing them access, then why use the remote function? New models have touch sensitive unlock / lock facility, I am not able to confirm if MY 2010 on has this function, I'm sure lots of you will know, so if the car is locked in this way, they cannot intercept the remote signal......
I appreciate the OP states the alarm was set off so he had to disable by remote, but in the majority of situations the touch pad on the door handle could be used, it's how I lock mine, can someone with technical knowledge confirm this would help?

Andrew

Interesting, the touch sensitive locking is designed to only work when the car can detect the key transmitting and it is outside the car, otherwise the car could easily be locked with the key inside. In the case of a normal non-keyless-entry remote, the key is normally off to conserve power; pressing a button emits a strong signal - hence the ability to unlock the car from a distance - and if this signal is jammed close to the car, the car will not see it and will not lock or unlock. Equally, because the key is emitting a strong signal, it's easy to intercept but I believe the problem of capturing the code to unlock the car has been fixed by using encrypted codes and maybe also frequency hopping so that the key transmits on a different frequency each time.

With the touch sensitive locking, the key is not transmitting all the time because to do so would quickly flatten the battery. Instead, the key is listening and the car starts transmitting when you touch the door handle; the key wakes up and says "I'm here" and if the codes match, the car unlocks. The power output of the key is now much less since it has to be on repeatedly (though not continuously) - hence the "smart key not detected" message - to conserve battery power. Holding the key underneath the steering column (in the Evoque) wakes it up and may even (not sure) provide enough power to it through an induction loop if the smart key battery has failed.

What I do not know is whether it is possible to jam the close distance transmission between the key and the car so that when you go to lock the car with the touch pad, it fails to lock. If you're doing that at close quarters, you're going to be much more aware of whether the car is locking than if you walk away and just blip the remote. A car with a locked door is at least some protection.

So, the message is clear, make sure the car is actually locked when you walk away. The trouble with the keyless entry system is that trying the door handle to check will just unlock the car again. Mark

SVR in Estoril Blue

(sorry, got posted twice) Mark

SVR in Estoril Blue

Bungleaio wrote:

It's not just JLR that are burying their heads in the sand with this, it's all manufacturers with electronic keys.

Apologies for the daily fail link http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/art...-seat.html

Thanks for the link, a rather timely article.

The reason why so many manufacturers are affected is because they use a network bus to connect together dozens of small computers which talk to each other. If one wants to know what the outside temperature is, it can ask another which knows. When you open the door, the interior lights are no longer hard-wired to the door switches; instead, the computer in the door sends a message to the computer in the overhead console to switch on the lights. This is all to do with providing convenience features and reducing the amount of wiring but it means that a rogue computer can be connected and join the party. Switching things on and off, interrogate security codes, programming keys.

Some cars use two busses - one for the general stuff and one for higher priority things like the engine management unit talking to the traction control system, of example.

The ODB port provides just such a way to connect to the bus (sometimes called a CAN bus) and is there to allow dealers to exercise a car's functionality, obtain error logs, that sort of thing. It's also exactly why it's disabled in my Evoque and will be in my RRS when I get it. Even so, it is still possible to connect to the bus somewhere else in the car. By its very nature, bus connections are all over the place. Disabling the OBD port simply puts another obstacle in the way, just like a steering wheel cover

As the Daily Mail article states (and I did in an earlier post), removing the ability to program a replacement key through the OBD port is key to addressing this problem but will make key replacement a much longer process.

What I do not know is whether Japanese cars are similarly afflicted. I have the feeling that it's the German system with the prevalence of Bosch as a major technology supplier which is vulnerable; the Japanese have their own supplier axis and may do things differently. For manufacturers, there's a disincentive to do their own thing because many of the bought in parts - an air bag control unit, for example - will be designed with that standard bus in mind.

Not that Bosch are to blame. Their technology provides the basic connectivity and messaging. However, somewhere in the car, there's a chip programmed with the unique codes of the car and a computer running some software which, in response to a request "download security codes", reads the codes from the chip and says, "here you are: 123456789......". All fine if that request comes from a legitimate source, less so if it's from some scumbag's laptop on your street at 3 in the morning. This is the area which needs tightening up, or removing all together, so that in response to the same request, the computer says "What?"

Apologies for the long post. I don't expect my New Best Friend, Mikey will read it LOL. Mark

SVR in Estoril Blue

Thinking about this some more (night shift and it's quiet), there needs to be an additional authentication step by the owner of the car so that the software can obtain their approval: "I am only going to download the codes if the legal owner approves".

You could think of the owner being given a chip and pin card unique to the car which is used solely to authenticate the programming of new keys.

- Before downloading the codes, the software issues an 8 digit challenge code.
- The owner inserts their card into the type of device used for online banking, keys in their PIN and the challenge code.
- The reader responds with a response code which is then keyed in and authenticated and the codes are downloaded.
- Everything is encrypted.

In that way, it's certain the owner approves the creation of new keys and it is up to the owner to secure the card; if they leave it in the glove box with the PIN written on it, it's their fault. Nothing of course is going to prevent the car being stolen if the owner is forced to hand over the keys (or the card and PIN).

Just a thought though there will probably be lots of reasons why not from my detractor(s)! Mark

SVR in Estoril Blue

ravingmad wrote:

Gutted for you Northlondoner.
Hope you get it back quick or get the insurance sorted.

Why.....he hasn't had his car nicked yet !!!  2014.5 SDV6 AB Dynamic ... Fuji /Santorini Pan roof and 22's
2013 Porsche Boxster S 3.4
2014 Audi A3 S line Quattro
---------------------------------

Mikey72 wrote:

viper wrote:

Well said Mark

What was well said? That LR have a known vulnerability that has not been addressed? Wow ok really are all deluded. Go do some research on car theft and you will see that ALL cars can be stolen.

Yet more utter nonsense about how you should get a warning that it could be stolen when you buy it? I think Mark N would actually have to buy a car before it could be stolen, how many has he supposedly been going to buy so far that have never materialised?

If you have such a hatred (don't claim you don't all of your posts sound like a Whiney little kid) then why are you "supposedly" still sitting with one on order?

Oh and I call BS on your taking the dealer to the cleaners just like your stupid comment about suing a dealer over the fact that thieves can steal a car. You clearly know nothing of the legalities of fit for purpose as the purpose of a car is to transport you, you cannot sue anyone over the fact that criminals can steal it anymore than you could if the sat nav was rubbish or seats weren't comfy.

There is no negligence in a retailer not telling people that thieves can steal things, boy oh boy what a wonderful little world you live in.

Please post some more utter rubbish as it really is quite amusing how little sense you make. You spend a lot of time on here judging by your posts for someone who hasn't owned a LR since I've been on here berating the people you are going to buy a car from. Very strange

Dear Mr Angry of Birmingham....

Take a deep breath... here is a nice new forum for you....
Lots of like minded people to post with....
I apologise for stepping out of line and posting whilst not being a "RRS Owner"

http://www.psychforums.com/anger-management/

Let us know how you get on....  2014.5 SDV6 AB Dynamic ... Fuji /Santorini Pan roof and 22's
2013 Porsche Boxster S 3.4
2014 Audi A3 S line Quattro
---------------------------------

Mikey72 wrote:

As Fkarim says its odd how some are so passionate when they don't even own one

I agree Fkarim yet the odd thing is when anyone offers a constructive argument to statements that are made, instead of jumping on the bandwagon suddenly they get berated? Just look at the accusations and claims of being psychotic simply because I said all cars can be stolen and no manufacturer of any product has any responsibility to tell you that people may try to steal it. Yet none of that is angry, it's all completely 100% accurate yet apparently I should be screaming blue murder about the people who make my car? I didn't when my BMW was stolen and wouldn't if my RRS gets stolen which obviously I hope doesn't happen.

As someone who works with software I know how easily anyone from single end users to huge billion pound companies or even governments can be compromised. Do you think anyone who provides them software does so whilst stating, hackers can breach even the best security?

We want the convenience of keyless, but the moment you transmit anything, it CAN be intercepted. Remove keyless and there is the risk that these theives that have proven to be willing to take huge risks will just mug you for your keys. So it's a fine line.

Mikey72...Wrote

"Just look at the accusations and claims of being psychotic" ...

Slight distortion of the truth ...

You were not being accused of being psychotic... merely angry.....!!!

The tone of your posts... are... aggressive.. derisory and opinionated...  2014.5 SDV6 AB Dynamic ... Fuji /Santorini Pan roof and 22's
2013 Porsche Boxster S 3.4
2014 Audi A3 S line Quattro
---------------------------------

So there you go, it shows that people have different views

Sorry about your new pride and joy going missing, life would be wonderful if it didn't happen but it does