Hacked jeep vs a tag axle hitch

[Tour1]

Recently some computer hackers showed that they could invade a jeep's computer and remotely operate things, in particular the brakes. The short wheelbase jeep has an anti sway control that operates the left or right side brakes unequally to make it go straighter if it starts to do bad things. The hacker made it do a bad thing and of course if there was a mechanical or electrical problem.
The builder rates my Liberty at 2000 lbs towing without the anti sway or 5000 lbs with it factory installed. There is no dealer or home installed version.

So I am wondering if any of you have ever seen, heard of, or even thought about bolting a tag axle on to a short wheelbase tow vehicle to stabilize it and/or increase the rated tow?
The turning radius would change, I think, maybe front wheel alignment wouldneed adjustment on installation. Also since braking ability depends on tire loading, the axle would need coordinated brakes on it.

The load budget would go up by 3000 lbs so if the thing weighed 1000 it would still add a ton of tow, and it seems like the amenities increase dramaticly as trailers go over the 2000 lb mark. It would be best to have an easily dettached setup like maybe 3 or 4 reciever hitches but it would have to be proven workable first.

[pconroy328]

sch911 wrote:

AndyW wrote:

whjco wrote:
The "hack" was performed under a set of circumstances where the hackers had direct physical access to the vehicle and would be virtually impossible to duplicate over the internet. A security update to the UConnect software is available via download or dealer installation to plug any discovered security vulnerability.

That is false - the most recent demonstration was entirely via the internet, and they even demonstrated that they could scan for and find other vehicles susceptible to the same bug via the cellular network.

It's an interesting read about something that is likely to get worse before it gets better:

http://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/

Yes they did in fact spend several days with the vehicle physically enabling the exploit, before connecting to it remotely

They talked about redoing and then uploading new uConnect firmware. While remote firmware updates are old news, I was surprised that an auto manufacturer would turn down the chance to get you back into the shop for maintenance. 🙂


Physical access makes more sense.

Do we have confirmation from them that that's how the got thru the first zero-day?

[sch911]

To respond to the OP's question: Even if you could devise a hitching method with brakes, the limiting factor is the cooling system. You'll overheat before anything else on a good hot day....

[sch911]

AndyW wrote:

whjco wrote:
The "hack" was performed under a set of circumstances where the hackers had direct physical access to the vehicle and would be virtually impossible to duplicate over the internet. A security update to the UConnect software is available via download or dealer installation to plug any discovered security vulnerability.

That is false - the most recent demonstration was entirely via the internet, and they even demonstrated that they could scan for and find other vehicles susceptible to the same bug via the cellular network.

It's an interesting read about something that is likely to get worse before it gets better:

http://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/

Yes they did in fact spend several days with the vehicle physically enabling the exploit, before connecting to it remotely

[AndyW]

whjco wrote:
The "hack" was performed under a set of circumstances where the hackers had direct physical access to the vehicle and would be virtually impossible to duplicate over the internet. A security update to the UConnect software is available via download or dealer installation to plug any discovered security vulnerability.

That is false - the most recent demonstration was entirely via the internet, and they even demonstrated that they could scan for and find other vehicles susceptible to the same bug via the cellular network.

It's an interesting read about something that is likely to get worse before it gets better:

http://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/

[whjco]

The "hack" was performed under a set of circumstances where the hackers had direct physical access to the vehicle and would be virtually impossible to duplicate over the internet. A security update to the UConnect software is available via download or dealer installation to plug any discovered security vulnerability.

[n7bsn]

AndyW wrote:
... This won't fix the underlying problem of critical vehicle systems being connected to a cellular communication package (a profoundly stupid idea on the part of automakers, IMO), but welcome to the future I guess.

It's going to take a few high profile incidents before manufacturers really address this problem, unfortunately. After all, the security researchers in question did this public demonstration for a journalist precisely because Chrysler wasn't listening to them when they said the system was insecure.

Of course the real solution is NOT connect the Info-Tainment system (with it's 3G/4G and wifi) to the ECU.
As you note, a dumb idea.

Of course Chrylser LLC "not listening" has a lot to do with today's announcement of fines, forced recalls, etc.

[AndyW]

Never heard of it. On something like a Jeep Liberty, you'd need to essentially rebuild the entire rear half of the vehicle.

The hack in question only applies to newer vehicles, and there is already a software update that can be applied by the dealer to resolve the issue. This won't fix the underlying problem of critical vehicle systems being connected to a cellular communication package (a profoundly stupid idea on the part of automakers, IMO), but welcome to the future I guess.

It's going to take a few high profile incidents before manufacturers really address this problem, unfortunately. After all, the security researchers in question did this public demonstration for a journalist precisely because Chrysler wasn't listening to them when they said the system was insecure.

[ChooChooMan74]

Not sure which Liberty you're talking about, but mine, without factory tow, can still tow 5000. Of course, weight isn't my issue, as much as aerodynamics. Still managing 15+ MPG at 60mph.