Is it possible to hack the software to unlock battery, autopilot, etc.?

[Acho]

Ethically it is illegal. It same if tou purchased software which has premium futures that needs to be paid for in order to be unlocked. Another example is if you have cable/sattelite service which does not include premium channels and somehow you find way to unlock them.

It all depends on personal understanding if someone will take advantage of it if there is oportunity. I, in the case with battery capacity probably will do it if I can bet in case of unlocking my cable/sattelite subscription to all included the answer is no.

I have reversed case in mind - if I have few months old S75 with AP and find out that I don't use the AP at all and for my needs S60 will be more than enough can I ask tesla to lock this futures for refund

I know the answer but I am curious what others think?

 

[demundus]

since a lot of the software in the Tesla is pirated.

Uh... what?

 

[Reubenwelsh]

Ethically it is illegal. It same if tou purchased software which has premium futures that needs to be paid for in order to be unlocked. Another example is if you have cable/sattelite service which does not include premium channels and somehow you find way to unlock them.

It all depends on personal understanding if someone will take advantage of it if there is oportunity. I, in the case with battery capacity probably will do it if I can bet in case of unlocking my cable/sattelite subscription to all included the answer is no.

I have reversed case in mind - if I have few months old S75 with AP and find out that I don't use the AP at all and for my needs S60 will be more than enough can I ask tesla to lock this futures for refund

I know the answer but I am curious what others think?

I purchased a former Demo S75D a few weeks back. Due to swedish taxes being high Autopilot would cost me an extra $100 a month, so i asked them to disable it.
They did and refunded me $6000

Not quite the same scenario, but it seems they are somewhat flexible at least

 

[davewill]

Does it make a difference if the hacking is not software? What if someone were to hack the wiring and wire a switch to manually turn on the LED fog lights or rear seat heaters that are disabled in the SR? Are they then "stealing" the lights or heaters? Just a philosophical discussion...

 

[Cheburashka]

Does it make a difference if the hacking is not software? What if someone were to hack the wiring and wire a switch to manually turn on the LED fog lights or rear seat heaters that are disabled in the SR? Are they then "stealing" the lights or heaters? Just a philosophical discussion...

I don't see how this is theft.

You're doing the work yourself to get controls working instead of paying Tesla to do it.

It's like saying that putting an aftermarket spoiler on your car is theft because the OEM one costs 5X more.

 

[Chaserr]

I agree, but above some were saying that doing the work yourself is illegal just because that work is software. It's an interesting philosophical distinction.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

TLDR: It's not really theft and definitely not illegal to do, but also kinda obviously morally wrong. And nothing at all is stopping Tesla from clamping down on this. If nothing else, they could initiate a periodic check on each car where the mothership checks that the car's configuration is sane(i.e. matches what their side indicates it should have) and locks several features on the car for "safety reasons"(e.g. if battery is unlocked but doesn't show as having been on their side, they could disable Supercharger access to protect the battery). People could sue, but good luck proving that Tesla shouldn't view your rooting and modifying the software as being potentially damaging to those functions.

 

[Jashev]

TLDR: It's not really theft and definitely not illegal to do, but also kinda obviously morally wrong. And nothing at all is stopping Tesla from clamping down on this. If nothing else, they could initiate a periodic check on each car where the mothership checks that the car's configuration is sane(i.e. matches what their side indicates it should have) and locks several features on the car for "safety reasons"(e.g. if battery is unlocked but doesn't show as having been on their side, they could disable Supercharger access to protect the battery). People could sue, but good luck proving that Tesla shouldn't view your rooting and modifying the software as being potentially damaging to those functions.

Hacking software (or hardware for that matter) in order to get/steal functions that you would be required to pay for is called theft of service (in the US). It is a crime and carries some pretty hefty penalties. It's like modifying your cable box so you can get premium channels without paying for them. If the value of the services or functionality which you are stealing is over $1500, you will be charged with a Felony and could face significant jail time in the US.

 

[bkp_duke]

Hacking software (or hardware for that matter) in order to get/steal functions that you would be required to pay for is called theft of service (in the US). It is a crime and carries some pretty hefty penalties. It's like modifying your cable box so you can get premium channels without paying for them. If the value of the services or functionality which you are stealing is over $1500, you will be charged with a Felony and could face significant jail time in the US.

Spot on.

All theses "when is stealing not stealing" questions are hilarious.

 

[Dinoraptor101]

There's another catch. Tesla will find out as soon as you change your vehicle config. Meaning you would have to disable the VPN and then risk your car being blacklisted at superchargers. Also, forget about bringing your car in for service.

This guy knows what he's taking about

 

[Dinoraptor101]

Hacking software (or hardware for that matter) in order to get/steal functions that you would be required to pay for is called theft of service (in the US). It is a crime and carries some pretty hefty penalties. It's like modifying your cable box so you can get premium channels without paying for them. If the value of the services or functionality which you are stealing is over $1500, you will be charged with a Felony and could face significant jail time in the US.

I'm interested in keeping Tesla safe, If I wanted to create a machine that can restore its own firmware or self destruct.

Its not uncommon that most expensive software EULA like medial, government, and enterprise solutions declare any attemot in using the software incorrectly or reverse engineering it doesn't only void the warrenty but invokes a HUGE costly legal penelty that makes buying the car a simple solution.

Best example, hacking a Windows Pro OEM license in a corporate to activate spoof license keys will result in a 15k USD per machine hacked.

 

[whitex]

Hacking software (or hardware for that matter) in order to get/steal functions that you would be required to pay for is called theft of service (in the US). It is a crime and carries some pretty hefty penalties. It's like modifying your cable box so you can get premium channels without paying for them. If the value of the services or functionality which you are stealing is over $1500, you will be charged with a Felony and could face significant jail time in the US.

Ok, I'd like to play devils advocate here. Shouldn't it work both ways? If you steal a TV from a store, that's theft. If you buy the TV, and the manufacturer sends people to steal it from you house, that's theft too, no? So now, enabling a feature without paying is theft, so what if Tesla disables a feature - is that theft too? If not, how is it different than the TV example?

A good real example (because this feature had a set price like battery unlock) would be when Tesla disabled Smart Air Suspension back in 2013 for months. That feature was $2,250, so above $1,500. Did Elon spend any time in jail for that theft (he made the decision to install a sneak "update" to disable SAS in response to media overreacting to a couple of battery fires in accidents, only one of which was caused by driving over a hitch)? Or is it ok to enable/disable features as long as it's not permanently?

There are other examples of software features which Tesla permanently disabled via mandatory updates, is that theft too? How about sold features never delivered in the first place?

 

[ahkahn]

Ok, I'd like to play devils advocate here. Shouldn't it work both ways? If you steal a TV from a store, that's theft. If you buy the TV, and the manufacturer sends people to steal it from you house, that's theft too, no? So now, enabling a feature without paying is theft, so what if Tesla disables a feature - is that theft too? If not, how is it different than the TV example?

A good real example (because this feature had a set price like battery unlock) would be when Tesla disabled Smart Air Suspension back in 2013 for months. That feature was $2,250, so above $1,500. Did Elon spend any time in jail for that theft (he made the decision to install a sneak "update" to disable SAS in response to media overreacting to a couple of battery fires in accidents, only one of which was caused by driving over a hitch)? Or is it ok to enable/disable features as long as it's not permanently?

There are other examples of software features which Tesla permanently disabled via mandatory updates, is that theft too? How about sold features never delivered in the first place?

You sign fine print that covers them in cases where they have to pull back features. Much like when you click "Accept" on the EULA with any software or app you download. You've agreed to it.

 

[whitex]

You sign fine print that covers them in cases where they have to pull back features. Much like when you click "Accept" on the EULA with any software or app you download. You've agreed to it.

If I setup a website that sells electronics at awesome prices, but have people click through an agreement that I can break into their homes and take it back any time I wish without any refunds, you think that would hold up in court?

 

[Dinoraptor101]

Ok, I'd like to play devils advocate here. Shouldn't it work both ways? If you steal a TV from a store, that's theft. If you buy the TV, and the manufacturer sends people to steal it from you house, that's theft too, no? So now, enabling a feature without paying is theft, so what if Tesla disables a feature - is that theft too? If not, how is it different than the TV example?

A good real example (because this feature had a set price like battery unlock) would be when Tesla disabled Smart Air Suspension back in 2013 for months. That feature was $2,250, so above $1,500. Did Elon spend any time in jail for that theft (he made the decision to install a sneak "update" to disable SAS in response to media overreacting to a couple of battery fires in accidents, only one of which was caused by driving over a hitch)? Or is it ok to enable/disable features as long as it's not permanently?

There are other examples of software features which Tesla permanently disabled via mandatory updates, is that theft too? How about sold features never delivered in the first place?

Mega face palm moment...

Yes if you paid for a function and tesla disables it you are entitedlled to a refund, while this is not specifically outlined in contract it is the law, you pay for license to use software with intended purpose so long it's under warrenty or its expected use range. In Tesla that's the life the car. ~15 years

2nd.. Please don't go on forums with claims such as (Elon took our upgrades!) because clearly the update adjusts the LOW threshold to a bit higher to protect the battery from being punctured by rocks or other garbage people throw out like Pepsi cans.

At extreme speed the Model S will still downforce to max even with new upgrade so.... Yeah your example flopped.

Reference : Tesla Asks NHTSA To Investigate Fires, Will Fully Warrant Any Model S Fire, Confirms Ride Height Changes

There IS indeed a grey area in the consumer market on whether you can hack your own property to allow it do stuff, but remember the law. While you can jailbreak a phone to install whatever, it is not the hacking that gets you, it is the act of installing or in this case activating PAID software for free which is considered theft.

No one will ever sue you for rooting a Tesla, but everyone will Sue you for stealing their 10k software. And even worse if you teach others to do it.

That said OwO If Tesla literally pre-loads the software and makes it so easily hackable.... They're just asking for it...... Its like giving a kid candy and saying they can only smell it

 

[Jashev]

If I setup a website that sells electronics at awesome prices, but have people click through an agreement that I can break into their homes and take it back any time I wish without any refunds, you think that would hold up in court?

The "beta software" agreement that you accepted when you got the car pretty clearly explains that Tesla may change, enhance or temporarily suspend the software. If you don't like that arrangement, don't buy the car. It's a free country.

 

[Big Toys]

Round and round we go, internet lawyers everywhere. 16 pages worth.

Look at it this way...whatever argument you think is genius regarding what should happen if you hack the software, forget it, it's already been decided, you've lost.

Just go ahead and hack it. Tell us how it goes.

 

[whitex]

2nd.. Please don't go on forums with claims such as (Elon took our upgrades!) because clearly the update adjusts the LOW threshold to a bit higher to protect the battery from being punctured by rocks or other garbage people throw out like Pepsi cans.

At extreme speed the Model S will still downforce to max even with new upgrade so.... Yeah your example flopped.

Reference : Tesla Asks NHTSA To Investigate Fires, Will Fully Warrant Any Model S Fire, Confirms Ride Height Changes

No, no, no, you are looking at what happened eventually. When the SAS "update" first rolled out, it did not adjust the height of LOW, it completely disabled the ability to switch to low. Eventually, 5 or 6 months later they re-enabled it with new height got LOW. Oh, and the event this was protecting was, in Elon's own words, an event of "astronomically low probability" - the disablement for SAS was purely for the media, nothing to do with any meaningful safety increase. It Tesla disabled all their cars in a thunderstorm, they'd be protecting against a more probable event of a lightening strike on the car.

If we're going to use your approach to facts and only report the eventual result, then unlocking a battery and the re-locking it later is non-event, never happened. If Tesla can confirm the battery is locked at the time of trial, case dismissed.

Btw, I tried to find and link for you the blog from Elon, stating how improbable the underside punctures are, but it seems Tesla removed that from their online Blogs section, only keeping this one from after they add the armor to the underside.

 

[whitex]

The "beta software" agreement that you accepted when you got the car pretty clearly explains that Tesla may change, enhance or temporarily suspend the software. If you don't like that arrangement, don't buy the car. It's a free country.

You know, I looked through all the paperwork I signed, including all the documents Tesla has in my account, and couldn't find the said beta agreement. I pay attention to EULA's and stuff, there was no such thing in the car to agree to either when I got any of the 4 cars from Tesla. The only Beta notice/click-through-agree I see on the Auto Pilot Functionality setting screen, when I click to enable any AP functions - wasn't there when I bought the car by the way.

Can you please point us to a copy of what beta agreement you signed or agreed to? I'm curious what agreement you are referring to.

 

[Overdress4244]

At the end of the day, all that really matters is who's lawyer is better at convincing 12 people of what is and what isn't. There is a chance 12 people side with your lawyer, and there is a chance 12 people side with their lawyer. Are you willing to gamble on it?