this post was submitted on 16 May 2026

177 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

84768 readers

4750 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related news or articles.
Be excellent to each other!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

L3s@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

L4s@lemmy.world

L3s@hackingne.ws

177

U.S. DOJ demands Apple and Google unmask over 100,000 users of popular car-tinkering app in emissions crackdown (macdailynews.com)

submitted 3 days ago by excel24@feddit.org to c/technology@lemmy.world

20 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 20 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] yggstyle@lemmy.world 40 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This is a feel good poison pill to set precident. How do you stop developers from fiddling in their own hardware to adjust settings? Allow the poor defenseless manufacturers to lock down the system and give them more legal ways to attack people researching it. Wouldnt want someone to figure out that the subscription service we installed in their car is locally controlled! Goodness an error? Only our certified dealers can....

This is being approached in a way to weaken right to repair and ownership rights.

[–] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

This is the actual issue to worry about. Everything else is smoke and mirrors, this is the real issue at hand. The corps want complete control, and they're probably gonna get it.

[–] Th4tGuyII@fedia.io 36 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Weirdly enough there's a pretty easy way to stop emissions limits from being bypassed - make it a physical limitation, not in software.

But like with putting tablets into every fucking car nowadays, doing anything physically would require just a bit more money, ergo it won't be done.

[–] nathan@lemmy.permisuan.com 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

How would that work? I'm a diesel technician and a lot of the work I do is emissions related.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I guess we'd have to go back to using carburetors

[–] nathan@lemmy.permisuan.com 6 points 2 days ago

Carburetors on a diesel engine?

Also, that's absolutely horrendous for emissions and air pollution. I think it's essentially impossible to have emissions control not tied to software.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah because that'll be great for emissions lol

Also carbs make it pretty easy to adjust fueling, etc.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan -1 points 2 days ago

Right, but that's how it was done before computers.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 2 days ago

You mean like the billion physical DEF delete kits that have been sold and installed?

[–] Wispy2891@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

In my country they allow some small motorbikes to be ridden by 14 years old if it's limited to not exceed 45 km/h.

The physical limitation used 30+ years ago (a bottleneck in intake + different cylinders in the CVT) could be removed as easy as the software limitations that are used today. Maybe even easier than today as it didn't require a specialized tablet and an expensive software license

[–] baines@piefed.social 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

how do you have 0 software?

these hacks are pretty low level and you need something driving the control through the bus to the sensors and response

these systems are a feedback response not a fixed thing

[–] jaschen306@sh.itjust.works 23 points 3 days ago

This is literally a few cars on the road. How about we don't stop investing into electrification and we won't have this problem in the future.

[–] Greyghoster@aussie.zone 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What’s the DoJ doing cracking down on emissions? Everywhere else the Administration is trying to maximise them.

[–] luciferofastora@feddit.org 4 points 2 days ago

Different target group. The DoJ wants to punish individual workers, the administration to empower corporations and owners.

[–] anamethatisnt@sopuli.xyz 18 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Background on the Case

The DOJ first sued EZ Lynk in 2021, accusing the Cayman Islands-based company of violating the Clean Air Act by marketing and selling “defeat devices.”
These tools allegedly allow users to bypass factory emissions controls on diesel vehicles, primarily through the EZ Lynk Auto Agent app paired with an onboard diagnostic (OBD) hardware dongle.

[–] belochka@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

And that's one example of how one progressive goal (of reducing emissions, ecology, regulating industry etc) and another (of right to repair and tinker) can require a compromise.

OK, from where I am your problems in US are cool to read about, here that kind of customization is in the "fuck around and find out" territory with huge fines, but I see no concern about ecology either.

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Myth #1 – Deleting or Tuning a Truck is Legal

There is no way around this; it is 100% illegal to tamper with or modify the emission system on your truck in any way. It isn’t a state or local law (although those exist, as well), but Federal law. When we mention this, the first thing customers say is that “it’s for off-highway use only” or “it’s for tractor pulls.” They have the idea in their head that this will allow them to skirt around any laws, and that's hardly the case.

Yes, you can legally have your emission system removed from your vehicle, but it requires recertification by the manufacturer and a new emission label and certification issued. You can’t just sign a piece of paper and proclaim you’ve re-certified your engine. You would need to go through the costly process of having your engine re-certified by the original equipment manufacturer.

Another common misconception among clients is that the EPA doesn't go after small businesses. For reference, the EPA provides a list, by year, of every single resolution that is brought up against the Clean Air Act for vehicles. You will find cases ranging from providers of tuning equipment being charged over $4 million to a single owner performing a DPF delete on one vehicle.

[–] Griffus@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Are you trying to say that they are wrong with this text still only mentioning US law?

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No. This is literally me comparing their law to our law.

They claim where they are from (not the US) doing this kind of deletion is FAFO territory.

I'm pointing out that it's illegal (Federally) in the US as well. I think there are ways to use the app legally that don't involve deletions, but the government is gonna do government things so the expectation should be that the government does in fact target random individuals to hold accountable.

[–] Griffus@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 days ago

Oh, I see. Thanks!