Interesting info. I've only encountered production automotive and small marine engines, which explains why I've never seen it. Looks like someone decided it would be a good idea to add yet another somewhat fragile hydraulic system to our vehicles while, at the same time, removing a safety feature (physical timing restrictions) and sought out to develop this after all.

It'll be interesting, when these hit the market, to see how they fare in terms of longevity. I'm sure they perform great, but what good is that if you have to rebuild it every few thousand miles?

We weren't talking about IDS, we were talking about audits. I wasn't arguing, but rather pointing out, for those who may not realize, that audits alone do not catch competent attacks.

That's not an audit, that's an intrusion detection mechanism. You can't redefine industry standard terms to make your argument.

Do you know at all how VVT works? There are 2 distinct types of VVT systems I have encountered and both use cam rods. One has different sets of lobes (the most I've seen is 3) for discreet, still hardware-limited, valve timing, while the other uses an adjustable gear at the end of the camshaft, allowing maybe 15-20 degrees of adjustment in total; still hardware-limited. The VVT systems I've seen have all been configured such that the earliest and latest physically possible timings were still well within safe operating parameters.

Did you think the valves were individually operated by servos? Pull your valve cover and take a look sometime; it's at most a dozen bolts, most likely all 10mm.

Right, because admins don't have access to log files. If the admin is competent, the audit will only show their current access and any past access they want you to see.

they are if you encrypt them with pre-shared (in person) keys

Grant, view, revoke. On demand.

And that's why we have the term "design flaw" rather than "design bug".

Sometimes the only way to deal with someone else's unethical or immoral behavior is to engage in unethical or immoral practices yourself. Of course, there is debate over whether it's actually unethical or immoral if it's your action of last resort.

You appear to have lubricated that inclined surface more than adequately.

I think he was trying to say "Oh Shit!"

Simple workaround to the 5 year limitation, then: encrypt at the tap, transfer to the storage network, decrypt for storage. Boom, it's been encrypted and they can keep it forever. Fuck.

At the very least, no less than I can trust closed source.

I was making a point to the poster I was replying to, and no, the connections shouldn't be shut down by the ISP for any reason other than nonpayment, customer request, or a court order; but I wasn't about to start two separate arguments with that poster.

Partly because the moment the endpoints begin using encryption, the ISP has no clue what the data is. Fix that without breaking peoples' privacy and you'll have an argument.