GM knows what we're doing???? [Archive]

GMPX

February 23rd, 2008, 06:40 PM

Well, no solution yet The Bosch ECM only allows programmers limited access which is why things like locking can't be done. Unfortunately the reflash counter is very secure too.
It goes beyond that, if you flash the stock tune back in 10 times over it doesn't care, it tracks the checksums of each flash and only updates the reflash history if they change. Trust me, I spent a while looking at this.
This will be a thing of the future I think, FORD are doing this too.

Cheers,
Ross

JoshH

February 23rd, 2008, 07:29 PM

Not that it matters since I've already kissed my warranty goodbye, but do LBZs do this too?

LBZ

February 23rd, 2008, 07:34 PM

So I understand this I am going to ask again, does a GM tech have the ability to see how many times an ECM has been flashed? Can they see what changes were made on those previous flashes?

If they can't see the previous changes who cares? Maybe it was another dealer doing a OS upgrade?? How would they know??

rcr1978

February 24th, 2008, 06:54 AM

Don't give up Ross there's got to be a way to bust the little Bosch bastered's balls

GMPX

February 24th, 2008, 09:58 AM

LBZ has the ability to track flashes too, but it seems that they have not put the function in.

What can been seen on the TechII is the CVN number of each 'different' segment. The CVN changes whenever you change something in the calibration, there is no way around that.
Then what GM do is go somewhere like this site -
http://tis2web.service.gm.com/tis2web

Lookup the factory CVN for your truck, if one of them is not matched to the numbers on that site they know you put a non factory tune in it.

Cheers,
Ross

LBZ

February 25th, 2008, 04:34 PM

Any idea how far back the history goes for flashes?? Like is it the current flash? The last 10? 20?
IF it had the proper stock tune in it, would the CVN match?

GMPX

February 26th, 2008, 12:20 AM

It stores 10 'unique' flashes.
So, lets say you reflashed the stock tune in 10 times, it just still stores 1 history entry of that tune. Once you change something and the CVN changes (which it must) then it will log that as a new number to store.
So, it will ONLY add to the list of 10 if what you are flashing in is different to a previously programmed tune. On the TechII you can see the history of 10 'unique' flashes, not the 'last' 10 flashes.
Hate to say it, but they got it right :frown:

On the CVN, a CVN is really just GM's term for a CRC (cyclic redundancy check (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclic_redundancy_check)), if you get past the first paragraph in that link, well done. But in essence, the number can't be fudge so as to appear no data was changed.

Cheers,
Ross

lawnboy01

February 26th, 2008, 12:37 AM

So if we can get a together and come up with 10 GM updates for everyone to use, wouldn't that work? I have one or two dealer reflashes. I would assume there has been at least 10 updates by now. I could be wrong.

GMPX

February 26th, 2008, 09:51 AM

Check the CalID site - http://tis2web.service.gm.com/tis2web
I doubt there would be 10 updates done.

Cheers,
Ross

LBZ

February 26th, 2008, 03:18 PM

Could you get away with only two as long as they are GM ones? Flash one, then the other 5 times each. Wouldn't this work. Or does it have to be 10 completely different flashes?

GMPX

February 27th, 2008, 10:33 AM

Please re-read this post -
http://forum.efilive.com/showpost.php?p=64138&postcount=10

Cheers,
Ross

LBZ

February 27th, 2008, 04:05 PM

Oh right. Thanks Ross.

Eddysel

February 29th, 2008, 09:34 AM

So we could install 10 different tire size calibration tuning files and it would only show those with the last one being stock?

97K15004WD

February 29th, 2008, 11:31 PM

Would it not be possible to just buy a "play" pcm and put this in? I know quite a few drivers in states with emissions do just that. After the test, they pull the stock pcm and install their "modified" pcms. Just run on your modified box, and when it's time for warranty, put that box back in....

rcr1978

March 1st, 2008, 04:55 AM

The problem with flashing speedo cals in is they still bust your balls for being in there. They can try to void your drivetrain warranty for tire size.

Ross, if the full flash of a bosch ecm is eventualy functional would that wipe the slate clean?

wait4me

March 2nd, 2008, 04:44 AM

I dont think so as it writes the information to a seperate eeprom in the pcm and is not stored in the flash. Anything is possible though, just need to have Ross connect his brain to the test connections inside his bench pcm and figure a way out of this.. :) If anyone can Ross is definately going to figure it out..

Untill then, Yes a spare ecm is definatly the only choice i would think.

But really though, If you mess with your motor and break it, Should gm really be held responsible for that????

I really dont think so. Ive seen people bring in trucks that where mangled with holes in the sides of the block and obvious over fueling, and expected gm to replace it.... We as a consumer pay for that the next time we buy a new car....... It isnt fair really..

My thing is, If i modify it, and it breaks it is my own deal to fix it.. BUT if a stock part breaks and the car is all stock then by all means, YES GM SHOULD be responsible to make that part correct...

Eddysel

March 2nd, 2008, 05:38 AM

This is from GM and was sent to me by a fellow DP member. I have the entire write up with pics but it's very long.

Dealers should not automatically decline warranty assistance on engine failures due to the fact that a power-up device or modification is evident or suspected. The technician must identify that the failure is due to a power-up device by teardown analysis and diagnosis of the engine components. The following steps should be taken if an engine failure occurs and it is suspected that the modification or addition of a power-up device maybe the cause of the engine failure. If unclear of this process or direction feel free to contact your District Service Manager (DVM) (in Canada, DSM) for further support.

The technician should use proper engine diagnostics (engine tear down to inspect pistons, cylinders etc.)to lead him/her to the failed engine components. The attached check sheet should be followed and if it is determined that at least three of the check sheet items match the engine component failures then it can be decided that the failure is not a warrantable claim.
Engine failures that meet at least three criteria of the check sheet are considered failures that are not manufacturers defects in workmanship or materials
The dealership should contact the PQC, open a case to review the findings and make the final decision on warranty coverage. The DVM (in Canada, DSM) should be notified of the PQC decision.
Denied claims should be documented as follows: a. The check sheet completed with the technicians detailed written findings of his diagnosis on the repair order.
b. Photographs of the failed parts should be maintained in the RO file.

The customer should be advised that the failure of their engine was not due to a manufacturer's defect in workmanship or materials and therefore the warranty claim is denied on this failure.
GM bulletins are intended for use by professional technicians, NOT a "do-it-yourselfer". They are written to inform these technicians of conditions that may occur on some vehicles, or to provide information that could assist in the proper service of a vehicle. Properly trained technicians have the equipment, tools, safety instructions, and know-how to do a job properly and safely. If a condition is described, DO NOT assume that the bulletin applies to your vehicle, or that your vehicle will have that condition. See your GM dealer for information on whether your vehicle may benefit from the information.

EFIGUY

March 4th, 2008, 04:57 PM

On the CVN, a CVN is really just GM's term for a CRC (cyclic redundancy check (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclic_redundancy_check)), if you get past the first paragraph in that link, well done.
Cheers,
Ross

I didn't make it.:D

joecar

March 4th, 2008, 05:22 PM

Eddysel,

Can you please email me the document, my email address is in my profile.

Thanks,
Joe

joecar

March 4th, 2008, 05:24 PM

...GM's term for a CRC (cyclic redundancy check (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclic_redundancy_check)), if you get past the first paragraph in that link, well done....The first sentence is meaningless, I didn't get to the end of the first sentence... :D

rcr1978

March 8th, 2008, 01:53 PM

But really though, If you mess with your motor and break it, Should gm really be held responsible for that????

I really dont think so. Ive seen people bring in trucks that where mangled with holes in the sides of the block and obvious over fueling, and expected gm to replace it.... We as a consumer pay for that the next time we buy a new car....... It isnt fair really..

My thing is, If i modify it, and it breaks it is my own deal to fix it.. BUT if a stock part breaks and the car is all stock then by all means, YES GM SHOULD be responsible to make that part correct...

I agree but some dealers are taking it to the extreme like not covering the LB7's faulty injectors and giving you the :cucumber: because you have gauges or some stupid crap like a lift.

joecar

March 9th, 2008, 06:12 AM

Individuals should be responsible for their own self inflicted breakages...
Dealers should not try to worm out of valid warranty claims...

But, regardless of having said that, NO ONE should ever visit a dealer with a modifed PCM/ECM in their vehicle...
1. it's asking for trouble,
2. it's forcing GM to take counter measures,
3. it's attracting serious attention from the EPA,
4. the dealer will swap out your module (and now you lost a license), they will send it to HQ for analysis,
5. your warranty is now void.

lawnboy01

March 9th, 2008, 06:37 AM

4. the dealer will swap out your module (and now you lost a license), they will send it to HQ for analysis,
.

That would be stealing, wouldn't it?

97K15004WD

March 9th, 2008, 12:20 PM

No. Resetting / Replacing the unit back to factory specs so it meets emissions is not stealing, implied or otherwise. Let's be serious.

If you mod your vehicle, you should assume responsibility for your actions. If you don't, then what GM is doing is the outcome.

Warranty claims for non-factory damage IS stealing. Just because they are a big company doesn't make it right.

lawnboy01

March 9th, 2008, 01:02 PM

No. Resetting the unit back to factory specs so it meets emissions is not stealing, implied or otherwise. Let's be serious.

If you mod your vehicle, you should assume responsibility for your actions. If you don't, then what GM is doing is the outcome.

Warranty claims for non-factory damage IS stealing. Just because they are a big company doesn't make it right.

That is not what I meant. it wasn't "resetting" it was "replacing". What I am getting at is: My truck now is giving me a " service trailor brake controller". If I take the truck in to get it fixed under warrenty and the dealer knows I have done something to the truck cuz the dpf and egr are missing. The dealer takes my computer out of my truck and replaces it for no good reason, I would call that stealing. Now if I put a window in the block, I could see them dealer "taking" my computer and sending it to GM.

97K15004WD

March 9th, 2008, 03:59 PM

Modifying and/or Removing any emissions related equipment is a violation of Federal Law for any vehicles originally equipped with it. If your vehicle is only for off-road use then you are okay.

If it's driven on the road, it must meet the emissions standards for the year in which it was produced, no if's, ands, or buts about it.

If you modify your vehicle, you assume full responsibilty for it, fines, penalities and all.

GM will do as they need to get your vehicle back to factory specs in regard to emissions, they have no choice. It's the law, plain and simple.

That's why it is so important to have CARB approval to sell aftermarket products to the residents living in the state of California, or for GM to meet Federal Emissions in all States; It's the law.

Now, this is not fun to say. But the bottom line is, the EPA is a federal agency and the laws are federal, so they must be followed or you will bear the consequences.

In states with emissions testing, the cars driven on the street (that are modified) are increasingly targeted for roadside testing. Fail, and you have a pre-determined amount of time to get it "fixed", and by the way, here's a ticket and fine for your trouble....

What Joe said above is absolutely correct! Never, ever take a modified PCM back to the dealer. You are just asking for trouble....

joecar

March 10th, 2008, 03:29 AM

97K15004WD

March 10th, 2008, 03:54 AM

Joe:

I couldn't agree more. With the change in the political climate (pun intended) and the current "green" movement, the enforcement will be coming.

Not to delve into politics, but imagine what power will be restored to EPA if a Democrat gets back into the oval office. EPA hasn't had the money it has wanted to conduct enforcement because of the the current administration and it's focus elsewhere...

joecar

March 10th, 2008, 06:07 AM

97K15004WD

March 10th, 2008, 06:27 AM

The smog technicians attend mandatory training which they pay for themselves (this is one means of the EPA having a lot of power)...

They have been trained too well, he looked my car over very thoroughly and said "did you have headers installed" (which I had just swapped out a few weeks prior)...

I had a long eye opening (for me) conversation with him... the EPA have been ramping up and now they are starting to achieve "critical mass".

And they are going after the manufacturers to make their PCM's secure.

Yeah, it was going to happen. Just didn't know when. Oh well, hopefully we will have a while longer. I just hate it for the guys who are trying to make a living doing this. All it takes is one person to say " well, I had so and so do this custom tune" and the EPA will take it from there..

GMPX

March 10th, 2008, 09:58 AM

And they are going after the manufacturers to make their PCM's secure.

They sort of are secure from prying eyes as is, however, based on some of the European makers are doing (Siemens TriCore ECM's), the future of tuning is looking a little worrying. The dumb part is, lets imagine they stop reflashing access and they epoxy the ECM PCB, Motec will be happy because just like Toyota's (who's ECM's can't be flashed) people will just use an aftermarket controller.

Cheers,
Ross

joecar

March 10th, 2008, 12:42 PM

That would be stealing, wouldn't it?Funny thing is that you don't own your PCM... GM has all the rights to it, or at least it appears that way.

N0DIH

March 10th, 2008, 03:33 PM

They could go as far as starting to add something like a WIBU key that each dealer needs to have that would be PART of the car's total encrption scheme and just encode it so tight that no one can decypt it without the key and only dealers would be able to get them (like a lease) from GM.

We use at work software WIBU keys (wibu.com) that are on internal servers and if you aren't on the inside you can't access it directly. Would put a SERIOUS damper on things. So if you must travel, you have to carry a parallel port WIBU key with you (or USB), or connect up whereyou can directly get to the internal servers.

Probably going to be like the "old days" on the LT1 where people ditched the 96-97 LT1 OBD2 PCMs and did an OBD1 conversion and did away with it.... But that won't last for long. They'll put stops in there for that too eventually.

They sort of are secure from prying eyes as is, however, based on some of the European makers are doing (Siemens TriCore ECM's), the future of tuning is looking a little worrying. The dumb part is, lets imagine they stop reflashing access and they epoxy the ECM PCB, Motec will be happy because just like Toyota's (who's ECM's can't be flashed) people will just use an aftermarket controller.

Cheers,
Ross

dc_justin

March 11th, 2008, 12:46 AM

Yeah, it was going to happen. Just didn't know when. Oh well, hopefully we will have a while longer. I just hate it for the guys who are trying to make a living doing this. All it takes is one person to say " well, I had so and so do this custom tune" and the EPA will take it from there..

There needs to be a point where the EPA's value-add to the environment is weighted against the monetary cost of operating. At this point, with the voluntary green movement that so many people appear to be adopting, it is driving auto manufacturers to trend that way as well, without a necessary need for govenment intervention. With that happening, it really seems that spending literally billions of dollars to tar and feather what amounts to much less than 1% of the population is absurd.

The automotive industry has done more than it's fair share of pollution control in the past 30 years. It's time for a break, go after somebody else.

97K15004WD

March 11th, 2008, 01:31 AM

I believe the "fine" for each emmissions item tampered with is $1500 per item...

e.g. for a gasser: 2 cats removed, 4 O2 sensors removed, AIR removed, EGR removed, headers installed, 1 PCM modified, total = $15,000.

They haven't been strictly enforcing this, but it appears they are ramping up...
it appears that in the near future they may even offer "rewards" to smog technicians who report instances.

These (the fines) are already in place. The fines are real, they just haven't been enforced. When the Federal Government starts offering rewards to whomever turns someone in, you can bet they will be writing out the checks. All it takes is one unhappy customer, and one phone call. The rest will happen by itself. The wheels are in motion....

For example, there was a guy on this forum a while back that had a tune done, and was raising sand about it. You don't think he wouldn't take the first opportunity he had to "get even", oh, and by the way, get a check from the Fed's in return for his "effort"?

We all know it is illegal to remove "cats", but some people do it. You won't find a muffler shop that will remove "cats" for fear of the huge fine, of course, unless it's your buddy.

If you do something illegal, you will eventually get caught. No way around it. Just be prepared to pay the piper when it happens. Just like speeding, we all know it's wrong, but everyone does it. It's rotten luck to get the ticket, but when we do, we accept it and move on.

This won't be much different. The fines will be larger and hurt a lot more, and you will need to take your vehicle back to a non-modified state for ON-Road use.

The Smog Techs are real, are being trained, and it's underway. Just be ready....

97K15004WD

March 11th, 2008, 02:14 AM

If you think the lawsuits won't happen once the rewards are offered, just read this article from the Wall Street Journal. This guy was making a living doing this...............

==================================

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB112924792244868264-_tMx7xjZSaV89CMWg9qkxcX0d3s_20061014.html

"Online Retailer Skips Sales Tax? You Might Sue
By ROBERT GUY MATTHEWS
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
October 14, 2005

CHICAGO -- Like many shoppers, attorney Stephen Diamond buys lots of stuff online. But unlike other consumers, he sues retailers that don't charge him state and local sales taxes -- and is making a profit doing it.

Using a state whistle-blower law, Mr. Diamond since 2002 has filed about 95 suits in Cook County court here against retailers that failed to charge him taxes on Internet sales, alleging that they broke the law. In cases where the state of Illinois joins the suits and prevails, he is entitled to up to 25% of the financial damages, with the rest going to state coffers.

Mr. Diamond's first eight suits were filed against such retailers as Wal-Mart Stores Inc., Office Depot Inc. and KB Toys Inc. He has netted about a half-million dollars already, from some retailers. Because of settlement agreements between the retailers and the attorney general's office, the state's judges have agreed to keep the names of most of the retailers and the settlement amounts confidential. More than 80 suits are pending in Illinois, and Mr. Diamond has made forays into other states as well.

"This is a no-brainer," says Mr. Diamond, a veteran class-action attorney who has a scenic view of Lake Michigan from his downtown office. "I started going on the Internet and discovered to my astonishment that companies like Target Corp. and Wal-Mart were not collecting taxes on their Internet sales. I was like, "Wow!"

Online buyers are required to pay local and state sales taxes on purchases made over the Internet, but are rarely asked to do so. States and online retailers have argued for years over whether the retailers should and could collect the taxes, but now states are becoming increasingly aggressive. This month, 18 states formed a coalition to make it easier to collect taxes on Web sales."

joecar

March 11th, 2008, 03:23 AM

Yep that verifies the level of life of attorneys.

97K15004WD

March 13th, 2008, 12:20 PM

Might not be a bad idea to avoid doing business with that state since they have the whistle blower law and can make money on it......

You never know who you are selling to...

Code3Response

April 14th, 2008, 02:31 PM

Any luck with anything here....?

joecar

April 14th, 2008, 03:34 PM

Any luck with anything here....?You never know what idea some bored politician will get in his/her head... :bawl:

N0DIH

April 15th, 2008, 02:09 AM

Yeah, I have seen some strange people just pop out of the woodwork and ask for stuff... Makes you wonder....

Might not be a bad idea to avoid doing business with that state since they have the whistle blower law and can make money on it......

You never know who you are selling to...

Mr. P.

April 15th, 2008, 06:24 AM

...That's why it is so important to have CARB approval to sell aftermarket products to the residents living in the state of California, or for GM to meet Federal Emissions in all States; It's the law...
Well this is a glimpse at the bigger issue - if the EPA is successful at locking engine controls this will be the death of a major segment of the aftermarket. If you cannot change your tune then you won't be able to stroke your engine, or buy great engine heads, or aftermarket cams, or headers, or etc unless the changes are so mild they can be accurately metered by a MAF (in the coming generation of OBD3 stuff). Not to mention supercharged applications. This can potentially put a serious economic downturn in the hobby.

Mr. P.

LBZ

April 15th, 2008, 01:25 PM

This won't be the end of the world if it happens folks. It just means no more modifying OEM ECM's. Now that does suck, but there is always stand alone tuning systems. I'm not 100% on this but I think they already exist for the Dmax. Maybe it's Banks that has something in the works already, but I'm not sure. Will it be illegal-who knows.

joecar

April 15th, 2008, 01:30 PM

If it's locked/protected/hidden/hackproof, then it will be hacked...

N0DIH

April 16th, 2008, 03:27 AM

If there is a memory on the board, it is open game.... 0's and 1's.... It can be read.... The "problem" would be if it was encrypted on the memory and the processor was the only way to know how to decrypt..... Still wouldn't stop it from being read and written....

Make a validation on every startup to validate checksum prior to startup, or a checksum table in the BCM to validate every key on....

If they wanted to, they could make it tough....

GMPX

April 17th, 2008, 10:54 AM

N0DIH

April 18th, 2008, 03:32 AM

You would think if GM was really worried they would just password lock their tunes just like paranoid tuners do.... :) (don't get offended boys and girls.....I am just jabbing...)

dc_justin

April 18th, 2008, 04:44 AM

You would think if GM was really worried they would just password lock their tunes just like paranoid tuners do.... :) (don't get offended boys and girls.....I am just jabbing...)

GM already does lock them. ;-) They just use a recurring set of keys.

Tazman10

April 24th, 2008, 01:42 AM

The ECM is only one part of the issue. The TCM is recording data also. Maybe a torque curve or excelleration value or ......hmmmmmm! Unfortunatly the LMM is about to be scrutinized because of the DPF. The LBZ has the same capability but probably will not be used in the same way.

BCM and SIR can also play a part. The thoughts of just swapping the ECM with a stock one won't really mask the modifications if the technician knows where to look. If not then you should be good to go.

If I owned a LMM...I would not throw the DPF away just yet. You may need it again in the near future.