Study finds concern over security breach potential in self-driving car technology

New technologies designed to take the driving of automobiles out of human hands and in the care of computers could make the roads safer - but some fear that such a system would be vulnerable to security breaches, as well.

|
Jonathan Alcorn/Reuters/File
Traffic moves in Los Angeles, California. A college student believes that he can develop a kit that can transform any normal car to a self-autonomous vehicle for less than $4,000.

Connected cars, like autonomous cars, are coming. In fact, connected cars will likely arrive first, because the underlying vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) technology is simpler, cheaper, and enhances the effectiveness of self-driving vehicles by allowing them to "talk" to other cars on the road.

Given our increasingly connected lives, you'd think that consumers would be comfortable with the impending arrival of connected vehicles. But just to be sure, the University of Michigan's Transportation Research Institute conducted a survey to quantify drivers' opinions. 

To carry out their study, UMTRI's Brandon Schoettle and Michael Sivak created an online questionnaire that was answered by roughly 1,600 people in the U.S., the U.K., and Australia. Those responses confirmed general enthusiasm for connected vehicles, but also made clear that automakers need to address a few fears going forward.

FINDINGS

The good news -- at least for tech fans -- was that 62 percent of UMTRI's respondents said that they had a positive opinion of connected cars, while "about a third" were neutral. A slim minority expressed negative feelings about V2V technology.

What's more, roughly 75 percent of participants believed that "connected vehicles will reduce the number and severity of crashes, improve emergency response times and result in better fuel economy". And, 60 percent expected to see lower vehicle emissions, less congestion, and shorter commutes as a result of V2V technology.

U.K. residents were the most optimistic about connected-cars, with 67 percent expressing positive opinions about them and just 4 percent sharing negative opinions. Australians followed, with 63 percent responding positively and 5 percent negatively. Americans were the most skeptical, with just 57 percent (still, a majority) seeing V2V technology as a positive development and 7 percent holding negative views. Despite the naysayers, 86 percent of respondents expressed interest having a connected car in the future.

The dark cloud hanging over V2V is hacking: roughly 30 percent of those surveyed  were "very concerned" about security breaches on individual vehicles and on networks, with many worried that the technology might be used to track their speed and location. An additional 37 percent were "moderately concerned", with around 25 percent "slightly concerned".

  
 Respondents also worried about failures of connected-vehicle networks, particularly during bad weather. And of course, more than a few thought that V2V technology might become a distraction or that drivers would become overly reliant upon it.

PROBLEMS

The UMTRI survey isn't without its flaws. For starters, the survey was conducted online, dipping into a pool of respondents who were likely to be at least vaguely comfortable with the internet and computer networks. That could've skewed the survey's results toward positive attitudes about V2V tech. 

Much more problematic, however, was the fact that researchers had to do a lot of explaining about what connected cars are. Sadly, only 27 percent of Americans, 22 percent of Australians and 17 percent of those in the U.K. had even heard of connected vehicles. That doesn't necessarily throw the survey's findings into question, but the spin of that explanation -- positive or negative -- could've easily impacted the majority of responses.

Are you concerned about V2V technology? Will you be the first on your block to own a connected car, or will you hang back and wait for version 2.0 -- or even 3.0? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

___________________________________________

Follow The Car Connection on FacebookTwitter and Google+.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Study finds concern over security breach potential in self-driving car technology
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Business/In-Gear/2014/0411/Study-finds-concern-over-security-breach-potential-in-self-driving-car-technology
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe