Class Action Lawsuit - Home Integration System

[tearitupsports]

I was instructed by Ford HIS support to do this and move the truck so that the rear open door was as close as possible to the charge station, back when I was still trying to get HIS to work. It didn't help. Apparently, the truck's Wi-Fi and/or Bluetooth modules are located behind the rear seat. I'm at 2+ years with a non-functional HIS, and not enough time to fool with it.

If you want to private message me, I can see if I can help you out.

Sponsored

 

[Pitbull2o08]

If you want to private message me, I can see if I can help you out.

Why don’t you help us all out? Lol we all had to back our truck up next to the charger, open our door, pull out seat up, stand on one foot, rub our belly and pat our head.

 

[tearitupsports]

Why don’t you help us all out? Lol we all had to back our truck up next to the charger, open our door, pull out seat up, stand on one foot, rub our belly and pat our head.

I know you are being sarcastic but honestly I would like to help everyone. It’s easier for people in TX though. I actually have helped some people on the way for business trips.

 

[Steely]

I know you are being sarcastic but honestly I would like to help everyone. It’s easier for people in TX though. I actually have helped some people on the way for business trips.

Yep he helped me get mine functional again.
Ran like 12 plus hours on the test yesterday without dropping out like it did last time. So it worked but I didn't get the test data I had hoped for. Figures.

 

[Pitbull2o08]

I know you are being sarcastic but honestly I would like to help everyone. It’s easier for people in TX though. I actually have helped some people on the way for business trips.

Will you be in San Diego?

 

[tearitupsports]

Will you be in San Diego?

While I have no plans to be outside of TX for a little while, I suppose for the right incentive it is possible...

 

[Pitbull2o08]

While I have no plans to be outside of TX for a little while, I suppose for the right incentive it is possible...

Yeah come crash at my place. We will chill by the beach.

 

[chl]

Not sure I want to get into a technical discussion of negligence with a lawyer, but, no.

Firmware has bugs like this all the time. What the sigenergy product is doing is...how can I put this? It's one of the first things I would have tried if someone asked me to try to trick vehicle firmware into exporting power when it wasn't designed to, and I don't think it should work, and I am surprised it seemingly works on so many vehicles from so many manufacturers, but, then again, there are a lot of programmers out there who are good but not great, or even very good.

It is definitely a CCS protocol violation, but, in some sense, so far as Sigenergy is concerned, so what? It gets the job done. That it does is a sign that many manufacturers' vehicle-side firmware is not as conservative as, in my opinion, it should be. But it's also not going to burn anyone's house down - as used by Sigenergy. However, if some homebrew "charger" or fly by night charger vendor relying on being liability proof because they're in Elbonia or whatever exploits similar firmware weaknesses - that could be pretty bad. So if it were my engineering team? I would be having some conversations with some junior engineers about when "be conservative about what you send and liberal about what you accept" is not the right maxim for an implementation of a communication protocol. But I doubt anyone would lose a court case for not writing their code to my personal standard.

Anyway, as a guy who's worked on a fair number of things generally like this, that's how I see it.

Well, allowing a 'protocol violation' to be in the firmware with the HVB system means someone didn't dot their i's or cross their t's and consider that such a violation was a possibility - a simple program step of checking for a negative value and stopping if it was would be enough to prevent that violation, eh?

If it were a dangerous oversight and someone got hurt or someone's property damaged, well that is kind of the definition of negligence, so to speak. Just in general terms, not strict legal terms, maybe the company's programmers should have considered that a protocol violation could be dangerous and used due diligence to prevent any possibility of injury?

For the sake of those using the loop hole in the firmware with their SigEnergy system, I hope Ford does not decide to change the firmware, which could bring up other legal issues if they did that without prior consent - but maybe we waived consent when we bought the trucks and agreed to their the terms of their software license in some boilerplate no one reads?

 

[chriserx]

Well, allowing a 'protocol violation' to be in the firmware with the HVB system means someone didn't dot their i's or cross their t's and consider that such a violation was a possibility - a simple program step of checking for a negative value and stopping if it was would be enough to prevent that violation, eh?

If it were a dangerous oversight and someone got hurt or someone's property damaged, well that is kind of the definition of negligence, so to speak. Just in general terms, not strict legal terms, maybe the company's programmers should have considered that a protocol violation could be dangerous and used due diligence to prevent any possibility of injury?

For the sake of those using the loop hole in the firmware with their SigEnergy system, I hope Ford does not decide to change the firmware, which could bring up other legal issues if they did that without prior consent - but maybe we waived consent when we bought the trucks and agreed to their the terms of their software license in some boilerplate no one reads?

If not, they'll add it to continue using the truck in a future update

Sponsored