Vehicles, especially highly automated vehicles, collect a lot of information during their operation. This information can be utilized to update map material, but also to develop and provide new services for customers.
According to the German Coalition Agreement, a trustee is to oversee the use of data generated by a vehicle. But some car manufacturers are against it. The German Association of the Automotive Industry (VDA) fears additional bureaucracy as well as misuse: "The VDA rejects the so-called trustee model for the transfer of data, as we believe it entails various disadvantages" said Managing Director Joachim Damasky (Source: https://www.automobil-industrie.vogel.de/vda-will-keinen-autodaten-treuhaender-a-1091693/). Or should customers be free to decide to whom they transmit their vehicle data?
Who should watch over the data of connected cars?
- Vehicle Owner?
- Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM)?
- Third Party Truestee?
- Government?
How do you think about it?
Very interesting topic.
I feel "Third Party Trustee" can be a good option as it is considered somewhat independent.
Thanks for the question Steffen Kaup . The data used and available in CAVs is huge and must belong to the user and made accessible with their permission. In the UK for instance, the government has statutory mechanisms to access these data from manufacturers and ISPs. Privacy has to be baked into the systems so users can have some degree of control of where their data go - although I'm not convinced this happens at present. Some of my academic papers deal with these issues.
Very best wishes, James.
Thanks for your answer James Marson of how this is handled in the UK. Is the data collected allowed to be used to solve crimes in the UK? Perhaps with a judicial order?
Hi Steffen Kaup - this is a little section from my paper:
'Section 87 of the Investigatory Powers Act (IPA) 2016 enables the Secretary of State, subject to approval, to issue to telecommunications operators and communication service providers (CSPs) a notice compelling them to retain, for a period of up to 12 months, communications data. These data may be retained for a purpose as outlined in s. 61(7) which includes (a) in the interests of national security; (b) for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime or of preventing disorder; (d) in the interests of public safety; and (g) for the purpose of preventing (or mitigating against) death or injury or any damage to a person’s physical or mental health. Consequently, intelligence agencies and law enforcement bodies are able to conduct targeted interception of communications, and in certain instances without a warrant.'
It's a potentially bad piece of legislation (known more widely in the UK as the 'snooper's charter') and we argue in the paper that CAV manufacturers and those who provide communications access to these vehicles can be compelled to retain and make available the data. It's quite worrying.
Very best wishes, James.
Hi James, thank you for your detailed answer. In my eyes, your point depends on how national security (a) is defined. In terms of detecting violence and homicide, I have no argument with that. Finally, the owner of the data, i.e. the vehicle owner, should be able to decide whether or not to disclose the data.
https://www.dqs.de/blog/informationssicherheit/automotive-cyber-security/
Another contribution to cyber-security: https://certx.com/de/automotive/unece-wp-29-r155-how-cyber-security-will-impact-the-automotiva-market-as-of-june-2022/
Ban: Teslas are no longer allowed to drive to Berlin police station
https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/mensch-metropole/berliner-polizei-laesst-tesla-autos-nicht-mehr-in-ihre-dienststellen-rein-li.239129
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Asia
- India