GM Onstar service

[Chuck Wintle]

This a fairly popular and useful option on a GM vehicle...but how does it work? I do know that in an accident it will contact onstar if the airbag(s) deploy. Does anyone know if it automatically transmits to GM the last several seconds of data in the computer? i.e. speed of vehicle, if brakes were applied, if seatbelts were being used etc.

[Duane Meadows]

Chuck, might want to have a look at this...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/21/onstar_ecall/

[Chuck Wintle]

Chuck, might want to have a look at this...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/21/onstar_ecall/
Thank you Duane.

[Brian Tymchak]

This article (http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/03/24/car-spying-edr-data-privacy/1991751/) says that Onstar proposal was dropped.

However, it's inevitable. They just haven't figured out how to get around the laws yet. But they will eventually. There's too much money in the data to not do it.

[Art Mann]

You don't have to have Onstar to have your automotive electronics rat you out. I worked on an airbag deployment system for Chrysler some time in the 1990's.The control module continuously recorded several seconds of speed, deceleration and crash sensor data and permanently stored the information during deployment. The purpose of this function was, among other things, to provide evidence of correct deployment and protect the company from lawsuits.

[David Weaver]

This article (http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/03/24/car-spying-edr-data-privacy/1991751/) says that Onstar proposal was dropped.

However, it's inevitable. They just haven't figured out how to get around the laws yet. But they will eventually. There's too much money in the data to not do it.

Call me a tinfoil hatter if you'd like, but I think a lot of those follow-up articles are telling people what they want to hear, and not necessarily what's actually going on. I wouldn't bet against an article sometime in the future where onstar says they "accidentally forgot to turn some (all) of them off", just as apple "accidentally" had their devices feeding data to the mothership, and facebook "accidentally" collects information or has defaults that aren't very secure on new features.

I recall google "accidentally" collecting a lot of wifi information when they were putting together google street view.

All it takes is for the government to say they'd like to collect the onstar data and they don't require onstar to disclose they're doing it (or that they suggest that they lie outright).

[Steve Rozmiarek]

I personally like my onstar, well rather my wifes, it makes me feel more comfortable about her being out on nasty roads. That being said, this is an interesting tangent that is so relevant today. Privacy vs security. Hopefully the market will be allowed to decide, thats us, not the government. Just my $.02.

[Brian Elfert]

If you pay for the service I'm pretty certain information about the crash is transmitted to OnStar. OnStar used to advertise heavily on radio and they included audio from actual crashes. In several of the ads the OnStar operator would call the local dispatcher and then read off information about the severity of the crash from the sensors in the car. This same information is recorded in the car's computer regardless if transmitted to OnStar. Local authorities or your insurance carrier could request access to the data if they wanted to see it.

[Larry Edgerton]

There is an "event data recorder" an all new cars sold in the states that continuously records the last thirty seconds of driving information. This is totally separated from OnStar or other makes similar services.

I do not like that Onstar has the ability to shut your car off, listen to your conversations even if your radio is off, and on and on and on. I see no advantage over a system that say, lets the customer control it, just a thought.

Keep big industry and big brother out of my life. Car choices with out these features are getting slim but there is a hidden cottage industry that specializes in disabling the systems while keeping wanted feature working. Some of my customers have this done to their new cars. My 2011 does not have such a system, but if I buy one that does I will be disabling it.

Larry

[Mike Henderson]

I had OnStar for a while but eventually cancelled it. I never used any of it's "features".

Regarding an accident, it's possible that someone could be in an accident and couldn't reach their cell phone AND no one ever came by who could report the accident, but it's unlikely. For what I paid for OnStar, I'll take my chances on being able to reach my cell phone or having someone else call the accident in.

Personally, I think OnStar is just selling fear when they pitch the accident scenario.

Mike

[Ole Anderson]

Personally I like OnStar. I don't stay awake wondering what they do with the collected data. I have used the service several times over the years to have them unlock the car when I locked my keys inside while away from home. The new long distance remote start is something I plan on using this winter. I like the monthly report they send me via email detailing remaining oil life, system checks and warnings. Recently my tire pressure was running 4 pounds low, not enough to give me a dash warning, but enough to trigger a yellow alert on the email report.

[Keith Outten]

Its my understanding that OnStar extracts the data from your car every month whether you are a paid subscriber or not. I would love to disable mine but since it ties into the cars computer I'm not sure how difficult a job it would be.
.

[Bill Cunningham]

onstar will send you a report every month on the condition of your car/truck.. As for accidents onstar wont work if your car is upside down in a ditch or has the antenna broken off. It came free for 6 months when I bought my truck. but I cancelled it when the 6 mo was over. I have a GPS, Bluetooth and manual lock locks, so onstar can't really do anything but spy on me for the overpriced service.

[Chuck Wintle]

Call me a tinfoil hatter if you'd like, but I think a lot of those follow-up articles are telling people what they want to hear, and not necessarily what's actually going on. I wouldn't bet against an article sometime in the future where onstar says they "accidentally forgot to turn some (all) of them off", just as apple "accidentally" had their devices feeding data to the mothership, and facebook "accidentally" collects information or has defaults that aren't very secure on new features.

I recall google "accidentally" collecting a lot of wifi information when they were putting together google street view.

All it takes is for the government to say they'd like to collect the onstar data and they don't require onstar to disclose they're doing it (or that they suggest that they lie outright).

Personally I think all of this big brother stuff has gone too far...I mean is there anything or anywhere where data is not collected? The little guy has no chance against the mass of data that is collected about he/she in the course of their lifetime. One really has to go of the grid to be anonymous these days.

[David Weaver]

Data is worth money. As long as it's worth money, it'll be collected. I don't have much fear about what they'll do with the data so much as I don't love the way they might use it to try to settle fault in an accident, etc, and add a bunch of possible ways to fine people, raise insurance rates, etc, for things that don't actually amount to material fault of the driver.

If I had elderly parents, especially if there might be an issue with minor dementia or alzheimers, I'd gladly have the service for them.

In terms of data collection, I have noticed (though I have no proof for it), that any time I go from google to internet service providers to look for information on FIOS or cable internet, etc, a few days later, I'll get a bunch of mailers that say "cost of your internet too high?" with a bunch of promotional offers for switching internet service. Last week, I looked around, and this week, I'm getting mailers again for the same thing. I would imagine that the large ISPs have purchased enough data or services to know when my IP address goes through certain pages, they can see what I was looking for, attach my IP address to my street address, and I'm getting mailers.

There's just not any real reason to fight it at this point, in my opinion, unless it's something that you surmise a specific problem may arise from it (for example, having data misinterpreted or erranty interpreted to make you at fault in an accident where you really were not).