As the U.S. Department of Commerce works to address security risks involving connected vehicle technology, the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association is asking for more oversight of autonomous vehicles. “OOIDA has raised safety and cybersecurity concerns regarding the development of autonomous vehicles as the technology has been deployed in recent years,” the Association wrote in formal comments. “We believe this Department of Commerce proposal can help implement necessary federal oversight for autonomous vehicle safety and protect private personal and vehicle information.”
In September, the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to prohibit transactions involving connected vehicle technology by China or other “foreign adversaries.” The proposal is aimed at addressing “undue or unacceptable” risks to national security in regard to communication technology.
“(The) Bureau of Industry and Security solicits comment on a proposed rule to prohibit transactions involving Vehicle Connectivity System hardware and covered software designed, developed, manufactured or supplied by persons owned by, controlled by or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of the People’s Republic of China, including the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region or the Russian Federation,” the agency wrote in the notice.
The proposal would:
- Prohibit Vehicle Connectivity System hardware importers from knowingly importing into the United States certain hardware for connected vehicles
- Prohibit connected vehicle manufacturers from knowingly importing into the United States completed connected vehicles incorporating certain software
- Prohibit connected vehicle manufacturers from knowingly selling within the United States completed connected vehicles that incorporate covered software
- Prohibit connected vehicle manufacturers who are owned by, controlled by or subject to the jurisdiction of China or Russia from knowingly selling in the United States completed vehicles that incorporate covered hardware or software
OOIDA’s comments
OOIDA is supportive of the rulemaking.
“As proposed, this rulemaking can reduce unacceptable risks to national security and professional drivers posed by vehicle technology components that are designed, developed, manufactured or supplied by foreign adversaries,” the Association wrote.
OOIDA also called out the lack of transparency regarding autonomous vehicles and the link between some of these companies and foreign countries. For instance, a former TuSimple executive was accused of failing to disclose his relationship with a Chinese autonomous hydrogen-powered truck company.
“We are aware of one major autonomous trucking business that is no longer operational in the U.S. that held extensive ties to China,” OOIDA wrote. “The company was among the first to launch driverless operations in 2021 but settled a multimillion-dollar lawsuit accusing it of defrauding shareholders, among other claims in August 2024. Further, according to federal court documents, the $189 million settlement came after the company doctored its safety record and employed at least three technology spies who planned to feed information to a rival Chinese self-driving trucking firm.”
The Association also noted that the Department of Defense disclosed that a Chinese company sells lidar to autonomous company Aurora.
“As of September 2024, Aurora has hauled over 7,000 loads for pilot customers across nearly 2 million commercial miles,” OOIDA wrote. “It’s unclear exactly how many miles have already been traversed in the U.S. by autonomous trucking companies using Chinese or Russian technology components.”
ELDs
As part of its comments, OOIDA requested clarification on whether electronic logging devices, which are mandated on most commercial motor vehicles, are considered “covered software.”
The ELD synchronizes with a vehicle’s engine to automatically record a driver’s off-duty and on-duty time and transfers hours-of-service data to a safety or law enforcement official,” OOIDA wrote. “There was never sufficient research indicating the ELD mandate would improve highway safety, and FMCSA still lacks data demonstrating any positive safety results since its full implementation. In the meantime, the ELD self-certification process has been a major disservice to motor carriers, as faulty and ultimately non-compliant devices have been listed on the agency’s device registry. The ELD mandate, in conjunction with the self-certification process, creates a critical cybersecurity risk, which is notable under the scope of this proposed rulemaking.”
Research from Colorado State University showed that ELDs are vulnerable to cyberattacks. Researchers were able to hack a truck’s ELD to gain access to a truck’s accelerator or to infect malicious malware.
“The Bureau of Industry and Security should specify whether the rulemaking will apply to ELDs given the intent of the notice of proposed rulemaking to address undue or unacceptable risks to national security and U.S. persons,” OOIDA wrote. LL
Credit: Source link
