OnStar Stolen Vehicle Slowdown hits the brakes on jacked cars

Although OnStar has offered Stolen Vehicle Location Assistance to its subscribers since 1996, the firm is getting set to add a snazzy new enhancement for 2009 vehicles. The feature, dubbed Stolen Vehicle Slowdown, can use GPS to pinpoint a vehicle once it has been reported as stolen, and after OnStar confirms with local police that it has the vehicle within sight, it can then be slowed down remotely. The system actually receives a signal that "interacts with the powertrain to reduce engine power, which will [in turn] slow the vehicle down gradually." Interestingly, customers will have the option of opting out of the service if they so choose, but we'd rather be safe (and potentially paranoid) than sorry.

[yacoub @ Oct 9th 2007 9:48AM]

One more step in removing control from the citizen under the guise of "protection" or "safety".

[Kennyb123 @ Oct 9th 2007 9:58AM]

Okay, Mr. Conspiracy Theory. Did you ever consider that added features MAY add to sales numbers? I, for one, think this is a pretty cool feature. I doubt it would be used often, but, I'd rather my stolen vehicle start to slow down when lights and sirens start blaring behind the thief, instead of him going on a high-speed chase and wrecking my sweet ride.

My two cents.

[Douglas Brace @ Oct 9th 2007 10:00AM]

If you are so worried about your privacy, then don't pay for the service when you get a GM car. If you don't subscribe to it, legally, OnStar can't report your tracking information to the authorities.

[nntpgrip @ Oct 9th 2007 10:48AM]

However illegally, they can do whatever they want.

You have two options:

Don't buy GM

Have someone forcibly remove all OnStar Hardware from your new vehicle.

[nikola @ Oct 9th 2007 9:50PM]

I see Generally Malevolent is up to their old tricks again. How nice, a system that not only tracks your every movement but can disable your vehicle remotely on-demand.

I wonder if they will be making these standard to co-inside with that incredible idea of taxing driving miles. Didn't pay your "taxes" from that trip to NYC? You get a notice that your car will only drive a max 30mph for the next two days and afterwards will become non-functional until you pay up, deadbeat.

Or worse, lets say you posted some nasty comments about the illegal war in Iran/Syria - someone at homeland flags you as a security risk who maybe shouldn't be driving on the highway (if at all)...and boom... they now dictate your physical movements (unless, of course, you walk).

Funny people attack these POSSIBILITIES as if they are some impossible far-out conspiracy theory. These are probably the sames people that fell for the Iraq-WMD conspiracy theory themselves. I wonder if they would even resist a camera being shoved up their ass, if it makes them "more secure"..

[Porfirio Reyes @ Oct 10th 2007 2:46AM]

LMAO!! you're a moron.

[nntpgrip @ Oct 9th 2007 9:58AM]

@yacoub - Agreed.

Like we need another reason to avoid GM vehicles.

So now if you don't have your "papers" in order, you are really screwed. They'll "protect" you real good in the "War on Terror" a.k.a. "War on Drugs II".

They'll slow you down enough to taze you to death. Whenever some hot-head "peace officer" phones anything in.

Screw this country.

Ron Paul 2008

For
The
Fucking
Win

[BrettB @ Oct 9th 2007 10:11AM]

It sounds like you have to report your car stolen first. I fail to see how this added service hurts anyone's privacy. You may argue that the original ONstar affects privacy, but this enhancement simply saves lives and property. So, please read the article and think before you post.

[nntpgrip @ Oct 9th 2007 10:19AM]

If you honestly think that it will only be used if you report the car stolen, then you must be one of those people who still think that Iraq had something to do with 9/11.

Thats right, trust government and large corporations, they KNOW BETTER, and are here to help...

[opnickc @ Oct 9th 2007 11:09AM]

"Thats right, trust government and large corporations, they KNOW BETTER, and are here to help..."

Large corporations care about money. They're not a big conspiracy group, there motives are clear, easily predictable, and only involve giving information to government if the government makes them do so. GM isn't just going to slow down your car because they feel like it. What the hell would that gain them?
"Ok, here's what we're going to do. We'll put in the ability to remotely slow down our vehicles, then do it randomly to our customers."
"Why would we do that?"
"Because it'd be HILARIOUS."

Yeah, that seems real likely. Quite frankly, GM doesn't give two shits whether you leave the car sitting in your driveway 24/7 or use it to smuggle drugs into the country, so long as you buy the car from them.

Now government, that's a whole different story. They can come in and MAKE these companies do things to their customers they don't want to. So I'll agree with your last point - Ron Paul 2008.

[Porfirio Reyes @ Oct 10th 2007 2:48AM]

It's pretty obvious that you're not the brightest of individuals. It appears that your tin hat slipped over your eyes you fruitcake.

[nntpgrip @ Oct 10th 2007 9:36AM]

So not trusting large corporations and the government somehow makes someone not bright? Did you fall asleep the last 30 years? It's called looking out for yourself. All this means is a little checkbox in the back of my head is now marked to "Never buy GM".

[Ty Justice @ Oct 10th 2007 3:45PM]

Yeah because you hear about soooo many INNOCENT people being tazed to death. Give me a break. There are bad cops. There are bad laywers, tax accountants, doctors, car salesmen.... That doesn't make them all bad. THE MAN isn't against you. The government isn't spying on your insignificant self and using GM's product to stop your car. You are a paranoid schizophrenic ... proceed to the nearest therapist's office.

[nntpgrip @ Oct 10th 2007 4:15PM]

Do what you like. I'll spend my money elsewhere. I'd rather not even have it being the smallest possibility.

All any of it would take would be a "Patriot" Act II or III. Why risk it. You can get cars that are so much better from other companies anyway.

Point is, we all need to be a little more apprehensive about giving up ANY control or privacy, because its always give and inch, take a mile with these people.

[Droo @ Oct 9th 2007 9:58AM]

This'll be great the first time they pick the wrong vehicle to do it to. The fact Onstar isn't optional equipment in GM vehicles is all the more reason why I'll never get one.

There's also the fact that their vehicles are bland and crappy.

[Lotheron @ Oct 9th 2007 9:59AM]

Yeah thats cause my 2007 Equinox bought 2 months ago doesn't have onStar as an *option*.

[Droo @ Oct 9th 2007 10:03AM]

I've never seen an Onstarless vehicle on a GM lot, unless the model didn't come with it in the first place. You can choose not to activate it, but the police can still call Onstar to turn it on long enough to get it going. It's pretty much standard equipment in a lot of vehicles from the early 2000s on.

[AndrewNeo @ Oct 9th 2007 10:41AM]

If you're so paranoid about your OnStar being used against you, then take it out. http://www.hackaday.com/2005/03/29/gm-onstar-hacking/

[Droo @ Oct 9th 2007 10:44AM]

Rather not even have it in my vehicle in the first place. It's not like this is a free feature, you're paying for the hardware along with the cost of the car, whether you want it or not in most cases.

[MasterCKO @ Oct 9th 2007 12:37PM]

"The fact Onstar isn't optional equipment in GM vehicles..."

Wrong.

[Porfirio Reyes @ Oct 10th 2007 2:51AM]

I lovez my Chevy Trailblazer..but ya, shitty plastic interiors FTL!

[Ryan P @ Oct 9th 2007 10:03AM]

What happens when the computer virus from Live Free or Die Hard takes out the cybertronic intergrid tubes?

[Nick @ Oct 9th 2007 10:05AM]

aside from the paranoid big brother ideas that come to my mind.. I kind of like the idea of this over the local police playing bumper cars with my stolen vehicle.

[StinkyPete @ Oct 9th 2007 10:12AM]

This is all fine and dandy until theves learn how to cloak a car from OnStar.

[Droo @ Oct 9th 2007 10:49AM]

Pull the fuse probably works. It's not like people haven't figured out what Onstar is in this day in age.

As far as I know they've been able to figure out where the vehicle is for a while. This could be standard practice by thieves already.

[Hacksaw @ Oct 9th 2007 1:42PM]

I would think if a thief was smart enough to "Cloak" an OnStar system, a GM vehicle wouldn't be at the top of his list.

Come to think of it, if a thief was smart enough to "Cloak" an OnStar system, stealing cars would be at the top of his list.

[Porfirio Reyes @ Oct 10th 2007 2:55AM]

LOL so true

[--Ed @ Oct 9th 2007 11:42AM]

Honestly if someone steals my car I do not want it back. Have you ever heard the term "Drive it like you stoled it". Well if some AHole steals my car they can have it. By the time this service gets activated they have already trashed the interior and ran over every curb in sight. So now that the police found my car the suspension, tires and wheels are shot, Engine and Trans abused so who know what problems will pop up later on that. Interior ripped up and pissed on.

Even if insurance fixes it, it will never drive the same and something is never going to be 100% like it was before. So I would never subscribe to this kind of service so I can get my trashed car back. I say keep it!!!

[xman @ Oct 9th 2007 10:19AM]

On Star is not standard equipment on all GM cars since 2000 and on for the poster who thinks this. I have a Saab and a Trailblazer and neither has the system installed.

I like the idea for the technology. But I would hate to be on the wrong end of a prankster's joke.

[Dasutin @ Oct 9th 2007 10:35AM]

Why do this when you can install a device in Police cars that can deliver a directed EMP blast that can disable a vehicle.

[TrentD @ Oct 9th 2007 10:49AM]

Because it will cause thousands of dollars of electrical system damage that now has to be repaired?

This results in getting the vehicle back intact.

[TrentD @ Oct 9th 2007 10:52AM]

Because it will cause thousands of dollars of electrical system damage that now has to be repaired?

This results in getting the vehicle back intact.

[Dasutin @ Oct 9th 2007 11:03AM]

Thousands of dollars of damages or lives lost, most car chases end with the car totaled anyways.

[Kurtis @ Oct 9th 2007 11:43AM]

Which is where this system comes in. Duh.

[Nathan @ Oct 9th 2007 12:55PM]

@Dasutin
"...most car chases end with the car totaled anyways."

Please substantiate this claim.

[Nick @ Oct 9th 2007 2:44PM]

Have you not seen one of the 200 episodes of "the worlds wildest police chases"?!?!?!

[Wwhat @ Oct 9th 2007 11:40PM]

Also this isn't science fiction where a writer can put in a 'directed EMP' to fit the story, in real life things have to be possible (and portable) and exist you know.

[Kenban @ Oct 9th 2007 10:35AM]

The 2007 Pontiac that is sitting out in my garage right now does not have OnStar and neither did many of the cars on the lot where I was looking. Its up to the dealership to decide on features when the car orders are placed. If some dealership is sticking it on every car on the lot just go to someone else.

[Matt @ Oct 9th 2007 10:36AM]

And once the crackers figured out how to penetrate OnStar systems or imitate the slowdown activation signal, you get unable to drive your own car, sweet in'it ;)

[Elliott @ Oct 9th 2007 10:41AM]

Sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen.

[Droo @ Oct 9th 2007 10:55AM]

I can see the headline. "Mayor's car inadvertently immobilized by Onstar".

Some of the small towns get lot Imapalas here instead of custom order. It'd be even more funny if it ended up being the cop car that was slowed down by Onstar. :)

[don hawkins @ Oct 9th 2007 11:00AM]

I am not to familiar with the onstar system but don't they have an antenna on the roof that can be easily cut and disable the system? I would think pro thieves would do this first---

[Andir3.0 @ Oct 9th 2007 2:48PM]

The antenna is for rural location access. The system works perfectly fine in "dense" areas without the antenna.

[yenom @ Oct 17th 2007 11:44AM]

Not sure if you all know this but All GM cars already have a anti-theft feature built in... don't worry, no one will want to steal it.

[Frankenstein Black @ Oct 9th 2007 11:10AM]

MAN, THERE’S ALLOT OF NAIVETÉ (OR IGNORANCE) UP IN HERE! You don’t think in this “brave new world” of ours if you are somehow labeled a “person of interest” (because they can apply that label to ANYONE) GM (like the Telcos) will rollover and track your whereabouts upon request? I have news for you my friends, OnStar tracks you now, all they did was make it one step easier. Thanks GM for making my Toyota, Nissan (or budget Tesla) choice crystal clear!

Oh, and keep telling the consumer “what you think they should buy” with those constant gas guzzler spam ads instead of what they actually need. Your oil pals fooled you into thinking you had a monopoly like they do. Hum, wonder when that first GM plant will open in China?

[MasterCKO @ Oct 9th 2007 12:48PM]

You're an idiot. OnStar has always had GPS tracking ability built in. From Day One. It was a well-known basic feature of the service. Somehow there hasn't yet been an exposé on a secret government program to track the people with the money and inclination to intentionally put OnStar on their car. I think we're ok for now.

Let me put this another way. A super secret gov't program of citizen-tracking that involves your targets' self-selecting to install an expensive non-standard feature in a family of brands that have collectively been steadily losing their market share for years is pretty fucking stupid.

[Frankenstein Black @ Oct 9th 2007 2:37PM]

Why do JIRKOFFs like you (CKO) come in here and "Pop OFF" when they DON"T KNOW JACKSHITE! I don't need to reveal my credentials to you but believe me when I say that OnStar is not your friend. Ask that schmuck sitting in jail wondering how they took his OnStar "off-hook" while he thought he was having a private conversation with his pals in his OnStar equipped Cadillac. Now go put your head back in the sand!!!

[MasterCKO @ Oct 9th 2007 7:55PM]

Sorry, but you still sound ill-informed and a bit crazy (and also somewhat unable to form a coherent sentence). Please feel free to back up your claims with actual evidence, people, events, statistics and what-have-you, though. "That dude in his Cadillac" doesn't count.

[chris fredette @ Oct 9th 2007 11:11AM]

YOU ARE ALL MISSING THE POINT.
There is a computer hooked up to you engine that can make it stop. I don't know about you but I don't need that extra crap in my car. I can see it now, you short a fuse that activates the system for some reason. Or maybe it can be hacked to actually start the car.
Also aren't these mostly needed to stop Bronco's? That's a Ford. :)

[Vooodu @ Oct 9th 2007 11:39AM]

Leave OJ out of this! Hahaha!