And so the appeal of older cars grows and grows. Enthusiasm for pre-enshittification era tech will only get more widespread. My daily is from 2006 (won't ever buy newer than that) and my fun car is a 1989 that I can fix with a rock if I have to.
this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2025
127 points (100.0% liked)
Right to Repair
2827 readers
1 users here now
Whether it be electronics, automobiles or medical equipment, the manufacturers should not be able to horde “oem” parts, render your stuff useless if you repair it with aftermarket parts, or hide schematics of their products.
Summary video by Marques Brownlee
Great channel covering and advocating right to repair, Lewis Rossman
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
That's rich. Not too long ago they had appauling security issues with their cars, now they think they can just paywall this? As usual, priorities are out of whack (Linux on cars, when?)
Linux on cars, when?
IDK man, I think cars have more than enough driver issues already...
I like a good pun when I see one
Hah!
(Linux on cars, when?)
I happen to know the VPN software used in Teslas to call home for updates is only installable on Linux. That strongly suggests that Teslas run Linux.
I find all of this very interesting. Seems I was wrong about Linux and cars not being there. That being said, and considering the terms to create code on top of a gnu license, where is the code at? I would be shocked of any of it is actually open and visible
Given Linux is GPLv2, the manufacturer is allowed to stop you from flashing your own compiled firmware. Not to mention insurance won't cover you.
Sadly this makes circumventing these user hostile & environment hostile practically impossible.
Edit: Also, the manufacturer would only need to publish the Linux source code (and similarly licensed software) while most features are likely implemented in a separate module and thus they are likely proprietary.
Those are good points. As I stated on another comment, out of safety and other stuff getting your code in the car sounds very difficult to allow, unless we would all agree that some sort of attestation would "certify" that you are not doing some whacky stuff on your car.
However, I do have a sort of counterpoint to all this (and can be considered a hot take): the dash system, architecture wise, should not be allowed to touch anything on the vehicle operation that involves either safety or driving. Meaning for example, you can (and should) be able to blow the ac with the dash, but never the park brake.
Linux on cars, when?
Someone correct me if I am wrong, But I'm pretty sure VWAG (Volkswagen Audi Group) software is built on Redhat for both the infotainment and the digital dash cluster, and they are riddled with issues 😬
That is very interesting. Question is, are we allowed to look into it at very least? I imagine not (I can understand change would not be allowed unless there was some audit process to ensure security, but at very least see what's there)
I won't speak for VW, but most of these systems are built on QNX. You need a real-time operating system for a lot of these operations.
most of these systems are built on QNX
the sad, sloppy seconds of Blackberry.
Fucking systemd.
So, there has to be a way to manually disengage the park brake. And I say that because otherwise techs wouldn't work on them. Time is money in the automotive service industry. That information will leak eventually. It's stupid to even intentionally try this.
Most of the auto industry already has to deal with subscriptions to Alldata/Mitchell/Identifix, and a bunch of manufacturers requires subscriptions or to purchase 1 day access to activate replacement modules. It’s bullshit, but it’s daily life for anyone working on cars newer that 2008 or so.
That's not what I mean though. What I mean is, in the event that for whatever reason the signal to deactivate the electronic park brake cannot get where it needs to go using the scan tool, there has to be a way to do it manually.
Say your vehicle is in an accident. Say the electronic park brake wiring is in shreds. That brake caliper needs to come off. The body shop is going to require a way to remove it if the scan tool can't disengage it.
Say there's corrosion in the connector. Same same. Has to come off and be replaced. And so on.
If the car complains when it wakes back up though, then you haven’t fixed the problem. If the parking brake motor locking is really the only issue than you’re right, we’ll just back probe the motor and run it backwards.
Changing the pads on your car’s brakes is a pretty straightforward and inexpensive process on most vehicles
I used to work in this industry. Every week we saw some idiot come it with a botched brake pad change done by a brother in law. It's fucking dangerous. I'm with Hyundai on this.
US auto safety is a joke, most countries require frequent safety inspections while North America is drive it until you crash.
That must be some idiot brother in law. Brake pads are safety critical but changing them isn't exactly brain surgery.