EPA caught VW cheating - how does the car know it's being te

[Winston_Smith]

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 00:19:10 +0000, Ewald BĂśhm wrote:

> Apparently Volkswagen/Audi cheated on the USA emissions tests

Apparently 11 million cars are affected!
Basically one in four cars in Europe also had the cheatware installed!

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/23/business/international/volkswagen-diesel-car-scandal.html
"the company said that 11 million of its diesel cars worldwide
were equipped with software that was used to cheat on emissions tests."

 

[Ablang]

Ewald BĂśhm wrote:

> My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for emissions?

How Did the System Work?
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/09/22/business/international/vw-volkswagen-emissions-explainer.html

 

[John Robertson]

On 09/22/2015 7:07 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
I'm more curious about how the EPA didn't
figure it out earlier. Reports say the EPA saw a
discrepancy between testing and on-road
results. But they've been haggling with VW
all this time and somehow never thought to look
at the software. Is the software accessible to
EPA? Do they have developers who could
understand it?

No. The software is a black box both to vehicle owners and the EPA. Not
only that, but under the DMCA it would be illegal for vehicle owners OR
the EPA to attempt reverse-engineering it from the object load.

How the test is faked is just a technical issue.
How the EPA didn't figure it out seems to be the
important issue. They only found out because they
threatened to hold up sales and at that point the
VW execs admitted what they were doing.
(Have they disclosed everything? Surely if there's
more dirty dealing they're not going to tell if they
don't have to.)

Gaming the system is a longstanding tradition among car manufacturers and
I am _sure_ that if the source code were made public that all manner of
interesting games would be found.

... Then of course there's the question that begs
to be asked: How could all of those executives,
in a company whose clientelle tend to be liberal
environmentalists, have possibly decided it was
a good idea to be so dishonest and shortsighted?

THAT is the best question of all, yes. But that is a question that
needs to be asked by stockholders, and I have a suspicion that the next
annual meeting at Volkswagen will be interesting.

There should be arrests. Either way, it's likely
to be a serious, perhaps fatal, blow to the company.
If it were Chevy I'm sure rednecks would come out
of the woodwork to support "the company that denies
global warming". But VW customers are almost a
cult following, and mostly liberal.

Arrests will do nothing. What has to happen is that vehicle control code
needs to be documented and available to the vehicle owner and to the
government inspectors. Yes, I know this makes it easier for technology to
be stolen in places where patent and trademark law is unenforced (such as
China, where the car industry is growing by leaps and bounds and trying to
learn as much as possible from Western and Japanese manufacturers by any
means possible). But, it's necessary.

If you want to see something REALLY evil, take a look at John Deere's take
on their proprietary control systems. THERE are some people who could use
arresting.
--scott

Not just John Deere:

http://www.wired.com/2015/02/new-high-tech-farm-equipment-nightmare-farmers/

https://dmca.digitalrighttorepair.org/

John :-#(#

--
(Please post followups or tech inquiries to the USENET newsgroup)
John's Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9
(604)872-5757 or Fax 872-2010 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games)
www.flippers.com
"Old pinballers never die, they just flip out."

 

[.]

On 9/22/2015 10:08 AM, Roger Blake wrote:

On 2015-09-22, Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
This article is not exactly accurate.
...

The point is that government malfeasance, which can and does result
in massive death, rarely if ever goes punished. I don't know how much
additional pollution is being caused by VW diesels or if the effect
is even measurable given their relatively low numbers. I do know that
governments routinely lie, cheat, steal, and kill (sometimes en masse)
all in a day's work. There's no doubt that what VW did was bad, but
the outcry seems out of proportion given the routine misdeeds of
the State.

What a goof!

 

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 9/22/2015 2:19 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 00:19:10 +0000, Ewald BĂśhm wrote:

Apparently Volkswagen/Audi cheated on the USA emissions tests

Apparently 11 million cars are affected!
Basically one in four cars in Europe also had the cheatware installed!

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/23/business/international/volkswagen-diesel-car-scandal.html
"the company said that 11 million of its diesel cars worldwide
were equipped with software that was used to cheat on emissions tests."

Boggles the mind. "Oh shit, we got caught"

 

[Winston_Smith]

On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 14:22:22 -0700, Ashton Crusher wrote:

You would still need to measure actual
emissions to see if the car met the emissions requirements.

I think this makes sense.

The VW cheat code does NOT appear to do anything clever.

In the official EPA pdf letter to VW, they called it a "switch".

Basically, the cheat code determined that the car was not moving but
that it was running as if it was moving, so, under that circumstance
(i.e., under what the EPA called the "dynamometer" settings) VW
engineers simply reduced the fuel to the engine, which lowered the
NOx emissions.

Under all other circumstances, which the EPA called the "road" settings,
VW engineers let the car have as much fuel as it wanted, NOx emissions
be damned.

There was nothing sophisticated at all about it. It's like me stealing
money from my own relatives. It's easy to do because they leave their
wallet out on the kitchen table without checking.

The audacious part isn't how clever it was (it wasn't at all clever).

The audacious part is that we trusted them, just as you trust a house
guest, and they violated that trust, just as it would be as if a house
guest stole money out of your wallet.

 

[Winston_Smith]

On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 18:20:29 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote:

> It's true that the proof is in the pudding

I once looked that up, and it's the truth is in the /taste/ of the pudding!

actual emissions measurements tell the real story, but you cannot
realistically measure emissions under every possible driving circumstance

You'll notice they drove the three test cars from San Diego to Seattle.
Do you know why they did that?

Because the trucking engine manufacturers were caught cheating years ago,
where, after hundreds of miles of driving, the emissions would slowly
creep up as the cheat codes slowly lowered the emissions constraints.

The only way to tell if the VW cheat code did the same thing as Caterpillar
and Volvo did in the past, was to drive for a thousand miles or so. It turned
out that the cheat code was not the same as the ones previously used by
the trucking engine manufacturers, but, as you noted, the only way to
tell was to drive very long distances.

so at some point the test will need
to be simplified, and every test that is simplified will have a loophole.

This is true.

The problem here isn't that VW cheated; it's that we TRUSTED them not to
cheat, and then they still cheated. It's like trusting a house guest not
to steal from you. Or like trusting the pool boy not to steal chemicals
from you. Or trusting the electrician not to steal wires from you. Or
trusting the dentist not to steal gold fillings from you.

It's a trust issue (in addition to one big legal issue).

However, seeing source code allows you to figure out what that loophole is
when the measurements don't make sense, and of course it also allows you to
determine intent. Booleans with name like EPA_ENFORCEMENT and SMOG_MODE
might be a giveaway too...

In the official documents, even VW called the cheat setting of the switch
the dynamometer setting!

 

[Winston_Smith]

On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 15:40:39 -0700, trader_4 wrote:

Otherwise it ran the car with emissions that according to the news
last night was 10 - 40x above the limits.

Notice that they had from 5 to 45 times the LIMIT (which is a lot!).

The lower/higher numbers were due to city/highway mode, I think.
(I assume the city numbers are the higher ones?)

The variation in the low and high figures themselves was due to the
different vehicles tested.

They didn't look at the code, EPA went after VW to explain the huge
differences between dyno testing emissions and emission on the road.
VW couldn't explain it and finally admitted what they had done.

I think, as someone mentioned, and as the news noted, the code is
actually covered by the DCMA (it would be nice to find a cite).

It wasn't so much that VW /couldn't/ explain, but that they wouldn't
explain it. They only admitted guilt when both CARB and EPA said they
would not certify 2016 diesels because they couldn't be certain of the
manufacturer's own certification process.

Only then, when VW knew their stock price would take the hit, did VW
finally confess. And even then, they didn't confess to the fact that
it's not half a million vehicles, but more than twenty times that
number!

 

[Winston_Smith]

On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 18:37:03 -0400, Mayayana wrote:

It's the difference between *maybe* risking their
bonus and definitely risking years in jail.

I must agree, unfortunately.

At this point, we don't know WHO was involved.

Please post when anyone finds out WHO the guilty PEOPLE were.

 

[Jon Elson]

Jack Myers wrote:

I have seen a suggestion that the onboard computer takes note of the
fact that the rear wheels are rotating and the front wheels are
stationary. That seems plausible to me.

Not all dynos work that way. I would expect such a dyno to drive the
stability/ABS systems crazy, possibly SLAMMING on the brakes or other
actions. (Most cars today are FRONT wheel drive, so the case would be the
front wheels turning and the back stationary. For rear wheel drive trucks,
of course, it is the opposite case. on these, it would be VERY hard to keep
the truck on the rear wheel only dyno. If it started to drift to either
side, the steering wheel could not get the tires centered back on the
treadmill.) On such vehicles, it might be necessary to shut down the
stability/ABS systems to even do these tests, which would clue in any test
detection software.

As for how the software could tell, this gives me an idea! The dynos have
some considerable inertia, but it is likely much less that the inertia
involved in accelerating the car to 60 MPH. So, the software might detect
VERY easy acceleration to highway speed as a sign of a dyno test. This
might also look like accelerating down a long hill, but if it goes on too
long, it indicates minimal wind resistance. If you are cruising at 60 MPH
with 4 HP effort, that would be a DEAD GIVEAWAY you are on a dyno! The
emissions test dynos probably cannot absorb the output of a big car's engine
to give it the normal highway load. That can be a LOT of power that you
have to absorb for several minutes.

Jon

 

[Winston_Smith]

On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 16:04:25 -0500, Dean Hoffman wrote:

The Justice Department reached an agreement
with GM over the faulty ignition switches. Prosecution
is deferred and the GM execs promise to be goodie two
shoes. http://preview.alturl.com/ctzff Over 100
people died.
I don't think Jeff Foxworthy or Larry the Cable Guy
are running the Justice Department.

You have to keep in mind that there are DIFFERENT laws when
safety is involved (NHTSA) versus the environment (EPA).

The NY Times, I think it was, discussed the difference, which
essentially said that the EPA actually has more power to fine
them than does the NHTSA.

We should look up the details, but, my point is that the laws
and maximum penalties are totally DIFFERENT for safety violations
versus emissions violations.

Inexplicably, the emissions violation laws appear (at first
inspection) to be more stringent.

Go figure.

 

[Winston_Smith]

On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 18:32:46 -0400, Mayayana wrote:

I'd forgotten about the GM issue. It's hardly
surprising these things happen when the executives
in charge have no liability. Even the companies
often find the deals to be profitable. If a company
cuts corners to save $100 million and gets fined
$20 million, with no arrests, then that seems to be
a good business plan.

Again, let's remember the laws and maximum fines are very
DIFFERENT for emissions laws versus for safety laws.

Different laws.
Different agencies.
Different penalties.

You could be arguing that we should make the laws more consistent
between SAFETY violations and EMISSIONS violations; but the fact
is they are very different - so - you can't really compare them
that way and be fair.

 

[Jon Elson]

Jack Black wrote:

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 00:19:10 +0000 (UTC), Ewald BĂśhm wrote:

My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for
emissions?

http://www3.epa.gov/otaq/cert/documents/vw-nov-caa-09-18-15.pdf

WOW, that's QUITE a document!! Thanks for the link!

Jon

 

[NoSpamForMe]

On 9/18/2015 8:19 PM, Ewald BĂśhm wrote:

Apparently Volkswagen/Audi cheated on the USA emissions tests since
2009 to 2015 by turning off the EGR to lower nitrogen oxide emissions
ONLY when the car was being tested for emissions.

REFERENCES:
http://blog.ucsusa.org/volkswagen-caught-cheating-vehicle-recall-887
http://www.engineering.com/AdvancedManufacturing/ArticleID/10688/VW-Caught-Cheating-on-EPA-Tests.aspx
http://hothardware.com/news/vw-intentionally-programmed-engine-software-to-cheat-emissions-tests-forced-by-epa-to-recall-482k-vehicles
etc.

My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for emissions?

It seems like everyone here is on a VW witch hunt.
I would expect VW to program it's black boxes to use the minimum fuel for a given situation.
If the car is on a dyno, there would be no wind resistance to push against so the fuel system *should* lower the fuel flow.
I'd expect the same behavior if I was rolling down a mountain grade. Sheeeesh!

 

[Dean Hoffman]

On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 08:37:44 -0500, Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
wrote:

| > My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for
emissions?
|


There should be arrests. Either way, it's likely
to be a serious, perhaps fatal, blow to the company.
If it were Chevy I'm sure rednecks would come out
of the woodwork to support "the company that denies
global warming". But VW customers are almost a
cult following, and mostly liberal.

The Justice Department reached an agreement
with GM over the faulty ignition switches. Prosecution
is deferred and the GM execs promise to be goodie two
shoes. http://preview.alturl.com/ctzff Over 100
people died.
I don't think Jeff Foxworthy or Larry the Cable Guy
are running the Justice Department.


--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

 

[Ashton Crusher]

On 22 Sep 2015 10:07:28 -0400, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
I'm more curious about how the EPA didn't
figure it out earlier. Reports say the EPA saw a
discrepancy between testing and on-road
results. But they've been haggling with VW
all this time and somehow never thought to look
at the software. Is the software accessible to
EPA? Do they have developers who could
understand it?

No. The software is a black box both to vehicle owners and the EPA. Not
only that, but under the DMCA it would be illegal for vehicle owners OR
the EPA to attempt reverse-engineering it from the object load.

How the test is faked is just a technical issue.
How the EPA didn't figure it out seems to be the
important issue. They only found out because they
threatened to hold up sales and at that point the
VW execs admitted what they were doing.
(Have they disclosed everything? Surely if there's
more dirty dealing they're not going to tell if they
don't have to.)

Gaming the system is a longstanding tradition among car manufacturers and
I am _sure_ that if the source code were made public that all manner of
interesting games would be found.

... Then of course there's the question that begs
to be asked: How could all of those executives,
in a company whose clientelle tend to be liberal
environmentalists, have possibly decided it was
a good idea to be so dishonest and shortsighted?

THAT is the best question of all, yes. But that is a question that
needs to be asked by stockholders, and I have a suspicion that the next
annual meeting at Volkswagen will be interesting.

There should be arrests. Either way, it's likely
to be a serious, perhaps fatal, blow to the company.
If it were Chevy I'm sure rednecks would come out
of the woodwork to support "the company that denies
global warming". But VW customers are almost a
cult following, and mostly liberal.

Arrests will do nothing. What has to happen is that vehicle control code
needs to be documented and available to the vehicle owner and to the
government inspectors.

I don't see the logic of this. The purpose of the code is to produce
a specific level of emissions. As the EPA found, and I doubt it was
hard, the on the road emissions didn't match what was produced during
dynamometer testing. How would anyone realistically look at the code
and be able to figure out that it "worked" as far as controlling
emissions? You can't, you can only tell if it "works" by measuring
what comes out the tailpipe. Sure, a good code reader, if they had the
time to look thru god knows how many lines of code, *might* spot a
weird program execution loop but that it highly doubtful and certainly
not a sure thing. And even if they did, it would not prove that the
emissions out the tailpipe FAILED, it would only show that someone put
some weird stuff in the code. You would still need to measure actual
emissions to see if the car met the emissions requirements.

 

[Jack Myers]

In rec.autos.tech sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

On 9/21/2015 9:07 PM, Jack Myers wrote:

snip

I have seen a suggestion that the onboard computer takes note of the
fact that the rear wheels are rotating and the front wheels are
stationary. That seems plausible to me.

Well the opposite for most or all VWs, but that makes sense.

Oops! Right-o. What do you want to bet that the source code
has this feature documented as a special low-torque mode to
facititate getting out of snow banks?

 

[Scott Dorsey]

Ashton Crusher <demi@moore.net> wrote:

I don't see the logic of this. The purpose of the code is to produce
a specific level of emissions. As the EPA found, and I doubt it was
hard, the on the road emissions didn't match what was produced during
dynamometer testing. How would anyone realistically look at the code
and be able to figure out that it "worked" as far as controlling
emissions? You can't, you can only tell if it "works" by measuring
what comes out the tailpipe. Sure, a good code reader, if they had the
time to look thru god knows how many lines of code, *might* spot a
weird program execution loop but that it highly doubtful and certainly
not a sure thing. And even if they did, it would not prove that the
emissions out the tailpipe FAILED, it would only show that someone put
some weird stuff in the code. You would still need to measure actual
emissions to see if the car met the emissions requirements.

It's true that the proof is in the pudding and actual emissions measurements
tell the real story, but you cannot realistically measure emissions under
every possible driving circumstance, so at some point the test will need
to be simplified, and every test that is simplified will have a loophole.

However, seeing source code allows you to figure out what that loophole is
when the measurements don't make sense, and of course it also allows you to
determine intent. Booleans with name like EPA_ENFORCEMENT and SMOG_MODE
might be a giveaway too...
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

 

[Mayayana]

| It seems like everyone here is on a VW witch hunt.

The VW executives admitted to the EPA that they were
scamming the tests. Try reading the news.

 

[Frank]

On 9/19/2015 9:40 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 00:12:53 -0500, mike <ham789@netzero.net> wrote:

On 9/18/2015 9:42 PM, Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:45:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I also find it interesting that a large allegedly reputable company
would do something intentional to cheat like that. Too easy to get
caught or ratted out.

According to the news reports, VW admitted culpability.

If I were the owner of the affected cars, I would NOT bring them in for
the recall, since it's not a safety issue.

They will definitely lose performance after the "fix" (while they will
also do worse on emissions testing results).

It's a lose:lose situation for the car owner to get the car "fixed", I
think, because of those two results.

Do you agree?
Is there anything "good" that will happen if the owners "fix" their
cars?

Will you have any choice?
If the test procedure for those cars is changed to test the "real"
emissions, they will FAIL.
If you care about air quality, you have to do that.
Here in Oregon, you don't get your license plates renewed if you fail.

Some cut.

Some states, like Nebraska, do no testing. We had some testing
for horns, lights, etc. back in the 70s, but dropped it. I think
the testers hollered too loud about the low testing fee allowed.
I wonder how many of the non-compliant vehicles will end up in
states with no testing.

They test here in DE but plug into the computer to do it, not just sniff
the tail pipe. Would guess our computer would be fooled too.
Testing is also static without running load which I would assume EPA did.