The New York Times is reporting that a recent opinion of the Ninth Circuit, though rejecting a wiretap request on unrelated grounds, leaves the door wide open to law enforcement wiretapping of the on-board communications systems (roadside assistance and such) available in many higher-end cars. Details of the case are sealed, but according to the Times, the system at issue "has a speaker and a microphone, and it turns out that the microphone may be activated surreptitiously, allowing government agents to listen in on conversations in the car."
The idea of a "roving" wiretap that can literally follow a suspect's every footstep (or in this case, tiremarks) is remarkable all on its own. But the idea that auto makers have been intentionally installing systems for outside surveillance, capable of being activated without occupants' knowledge is outrageous. OnStar, the telematics co. with the best consumer name recognition, flatly denies that any such capability exists in their systems -- the phone rings if anyone is attempting to connect to your system. And much of the record for this case is sealed. But the Times speculates that the case involves equipment from ATX, makers of telematics for BMW, Mercedes, and Ford, among others. ATX refused to return phone calls or e-mails for the Times story.
I hope that ATX, and any other telematics companies who may be engaged in this kind of slimy dealing, will come clean, as well as the auto makers who failed (through carelessness or otherwise) to take an interest in their customers' privacy. Maybe, just maybe, this whole thing will help generate a bit more enthusiasm for "privacy by design" and full disclosure to consumers.