#Driverless #Economy - Striking the balance of regulation and innovation

Your car’s safety is no longer restricted to the crumple zone – it needs to be cyber secure too, and 2015 was not a good test drive for the road ahead.

Researchers managed to remotely control the brakes of a car via a common insurance device, turn off a Tesla Model S remotely at low speeds and found serious security flaws in GM OnStar’s system.

Safety is a key feature of most car brands and the 2015 incidents were damaging enough without there being any injuries attributed to them. Many new features built into cars today are less about performance, focusing instead on convenience, connectivity and safety.  So brand protection will drive significant investment in cyber security too.

Competition from new entrants will have a positive effect too. While motor manufacturers have long been criticised for lacklustre software offerings, competition from tech companies such as Google, Apple and Baidu – organisations where cyber security is in their DNA – will significantly raise the bar.

But can the motor industry rely on competition and self-regulation, or does the government need to make penetration testing as important as checking that your brake lights are working?

Stringent regulation is inevitable, even if industry standards prove to be high. The pace of change will mean problems will emerge, as they did last year, and strict initial standards will be imposed whilst public confidence is given time to grow.

Regulations are likely to affect issues such as:

  • Adherence to minimum cyber-security standards, not just for the vehicles, but the systems and network infrastructure of the manufacturer.
  • The length of warranty and support upgrades to avoid cars with significant security vulnerabilities on the road.
  • Mandatory reporting of accidents and incidents.
  • “Air-gapping” so as to physically separate key functionality.
  • Sharing of security information (e.g. IP addresses of attackers or unpatched security vulnerabilities) with other manufacturers or government bodies, such as the DVLA.
  • “Safe modes” -  vehicles, shutting down autonomous features if any breach of the car’s security is detected.
  • Restrictions on unauthorised repairs and modifications.
  • “Backdooring” – the method by which systems can be upgraded, but which inevitably provide a potential door for hackers (and government agencies).  

Heavy regulation is often seen as a brake on innovation and change. Regulation of autonomous cars is inevitable, but the careful balancing of risk may see the UK continue to forge ahead in the industry, whilst steadily building consumer confidence.

Author: Patrick Kane

Click here to discover more articles from our experts every week.

Graphic Driverlessgb

Visit our interactive #Driverless #Economy map »


Connect with our experts in our dedicated LinkedIn group »


Follow us on Twitter @DriverlessEcon to join the conversation »


This information is intended as a general discussion surrounding the topics covered and is for guidance purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. DWF is not responsible for any activity undertaken based on this information.

What will a #DriverlessGB look like?

Use our interactive map to learn more about how a #DriverlessGB will affect infrasturure, insurance and technology.

Go to interactive map

Alan Owens

Partner - Head of Technology & Communications

I am the Head of Technology & Communications sector at DWF, and a Partner in the Commercial Litigation and Arbitration team based in London.