TXshaggy

Let’s not turn this into an EV or political discussion.

This has nothing to do about EV, it’s about cyber mandates on cars.

neteng101

The EU regulation is rather sweeping - its not just a cyber mandate on the car itself, it encompasses the whole design and manufacturing cycle. Its not limited to external connectivity either, there's requirements to ensure all the electronics and modules can't be tampered with, etc like ECU tuning/firmware hacking, OBD coding, etc. Indirectly, it can be seen as another push from the climate mongers to slowly obsolete all carbon based vehicle emissions - it will be harder to tune/modify cars over time as manufacturers further lock down the electronics, etc due to this "cyber" regulation.

Zhao

You know what's a good hacker proof solution? Keeping the automatic connectivity crap out of the car, and keeping the phone and infotainment completely separate physically from the rest of the car's systems.

That's probably what I like least about my Telsa is the automatic updates that change how the car functions and how everything is connected and controllable by software. And no matter how secure they think it is, it's defeatable. In fact, sometimes the best anti hacker stuff is the stuff that gets hacked the most as a challenge.

I remember back in my warez server running days when I was a kid there was a piece of software the company who wrote it basically publicly said they spent months and months coding it to be uncrackable. Well, that put a huge 'challenge accepted' target on their back. <24 hours of it being released some guy uploaded it to my server and chats me saying "cracked it!" So whenever some old fossil thinks there is a security solution that is fool proof I think back to being a part of that world that knows that if it's computer related it's only secure as long as someone isn't interested in getting access.

No one's hacking a throttle cable and steering shaft and pinion rack.

7184RS

Given the stupidity we live in Europe at the moment, I'm pretty sure this regulation has as final outcome some extra control about what we do with our cars and how we do it ....

They don't give a crap it you crash or someone steals your car because it is not cyber secure ..they just want control ...the more the merrier

Zhao

That is true. They had the GPS mandate for a long time now in Europe (10+ years?) for 'reasons', and if you think one of those reasons is to track stolen cars you'd be very wrong.

In Canada we have a massive problem with organized crime stealing cars and shipping them overseas. The cars pop up in ports with people's self tracking and its nothing but frustration if you try to get the police or government to do anything about it before it leaves for Africa or the Middle East.

Drifting

I just picked up a 2024 M440i and have an incoming 2024 Spyder RS.

I’m never selling the Spyder RS, and I plan to keep the BMW as a daily for longer than normal, partially because 2024 are the last cars to not be developed by Big Brother.

TXshaggy

This article mentions the RS exemption and better articulates the situation

https://www.motor1.com/news/713634/p...ed-europe/amp/

JCviggen

What are you referring to exactly? Even my euro 2020 GT4 did not have GPS. And GPS is one way (receiving).

People love to moan about their favourite bad guys without informing themselves first.

The automotive cybersecurity law is basically the EU forcing manufacturers to take the long existing and demonstrated problems seriously. Though it's just one example, many cars are ridiculously easy to steal due to major security flaws (plug into the OBD and you can start it a few seconds later) and vehicle manufacturers have had little incentive to fix it as it doesn't exactly hurt their sales. Without the EU forcing their hand, they'd go on making poorly secured cars indefinitely because... it's cheaper. You won't find that the general public doesn't support these kinds of measures.

https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/world...-standard-last

The 718 is a very old platform now, it's amazing how long they've kept it going. Eventually it gets too old to adapt to new regulations which is what is happening here.

Gabriel@NutCracker

Doesn't the mandatory e-call provide the missing ingredient?

JCviggen

That's not 10+ years old and is actually useful with no record of misuse, though it certainly would be nice to have proper security in place to stop anyone from gaining access to it (which the new law should help with)

For the privacy obsessed, there's no law that says you can't stop it from working.

Jonathan_987

Could you please elaborate on what you are referring to? I took delivery of a new 718 Spyder (in Europe, for the European market) last year and did not opt for/buy the navigation system. As it has now turned out, even though the head unit is navigation capable and comes with all the relevant data (see MIB and AIO), there is no GPS antenna installed.

If you are referring to eCall (the emergency call button), this is only mandatory for vehicles homologated after March 31, 2018. However, the 718 series is not affected by this due to its earlier homologation.

Knutsm01

Yep - you don’t have a good social credit score they reduce your HP by 50% haha

TitaniumVT

If electric Boxster production doesn't ramp up until 2H-2025 or 1H-2026, seems like this should make getting GTS allocations in the US and ROW easier after June. The manufacturing lines can still produce as many high margin cars, but there's going to be one less (large) market for them to be sold into.

What am I missing?

TXshaggy

The 983 718 EV will be produced at Stuttgart. The 982s are being produced at Osnabrucke; a VAG overflow facility.

PAG has already said 982s will continue for some time post 983 launch.

What they haven’t said is what trim and for how long.

The other unknown is VAG’s utilization and future need/use of Osnabrucke.

If current 982 capacity isn’t diminished, then yes ROW would absorb those EU units.

Jonathan_987

And what happens if EV sales do not take off as expected/hoped/needed?