this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2026
523 points (97.5% liked)
Technology
85695 readers
3729 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's a question of security risk profiles.
Security ultimately often times comes with a tradeoff for user experience or privacy.
How does device integrity checks materially affect the security posture for theft when considering this system? Presumably the security checks for remotely unlocking a car is based around credentials and authN/authZ for the unlock service call?
Enforcing client side security has entered the picture recently, but a lot of it comes from security checklists from people saying did you add this check? Sure adding a device integrity check may stop at least one malicious actor, but is it worth the cost? To most companies, they're going to say they don't understand or care about the impact.
They could just go back to key fobs since those can't run arbitrary code.
No one cares about privacy.