Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 1 minor 2 cited by

Contextualizing Security and Privacy of Software-Defined Vehicles: A Literature Review and Industry Perspectives

T0 review · 3 major / 1 minor · reviewed 2026-05-23 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A literature review and industry survey produce a security framework for software-defined vehicles that integrates mixed-criticality handling with layered defenses and privacy techniques.

desk verdict This is a standard literature review on SDV security that adds a supply-chain questionnaire but stays at the level of synthesis rather than new mechanisms or data. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.10612 v4 submitted 2024-11-15 cs.CR cs.OS

Marco De Vincenzi , Mert D. Pesé , Chiara Bodei , Ilaria Matteucci , Richard R. Brooks , Monowar Hasan , Andrea Saracino , Mohammad Hamad
show 1 more author
Sebastian Steinhorst
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CRcs.OS
keywords software-definedvehiclessecurityframeworkprivacyliteraturereviewautomotivecybersecuritymixed-criticalityV2Xcommunicationintelligenttransportationsystems
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper performs a systematic literature review alongside a questionnaire sent across the automotive supply chain to examine security and privacy issues in software-defined vehicles. It organizes findings around four research questions and extracts a security framework presented as a practical roadmap. The work stresses the need to manage mixed-criticality architectures, apply layered security, incorporate privacy-preserving methods, and align in-vehicle protections with cloud-based ones. A reader would care because rising software control in vehicles directly affects road safety, data privacy, and the reliability of connected transportation systems.

What carries the argument

The security framework extracted from the literature review and questionnaire responses, which organizes defenses around mixed-criticality separation, layered mechanisms, privacy integration, and vehicle-cloud alignment.

What would settle it

A new, widely confirmed SDV security breach or privacy failure that falls outside the framework's recommended measures or that industry experts in a follow-up survey say the framework does not adequately cover.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Through a systematic literature review complemented by industry questionnaire responses, the analysis produces a security framework that serves as a roadmap for SDV protection. The framework calls for addressing mixed-criticality architectural challenges, deploying layered security mechanisms, integrating privacy-preserving techniques, and harmonizing in-vehicle and cloud-based defenses to strengthen cybersecurity and V2X resilience in Intelligent Transportation Systems.

Load-bearing premise

The papers chosen for the systematic literature review together with the questionnaire answers collected from the automotive supply chain form a sufficiently complete and representative foundation for building the security framework.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • SDV architectures must separate safety-critical and non-critical functions to limit attack surfaces.
  • Multiple layers of security controls should be implemented at hardware, software, and network levels.
  • Privacy-preserving methods must be built into data collection and sharing processes.
  • In-vehicle security controls need to work together with cloud services for consistent protection.
  • V2X communication links require coordinated defenses to maintain resilience in intelligent transportation systems.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The framework could serve as a template for automotive standards bodies seeking to update cybersecurity guidelines.
  • Testing the framework against real vehicle prototypes would reveal whether its layered approach scales under live attack conditions.
  • Extending the review to include quantitative risk metrics from recent incidents could strengthen the roadmap for future SDV generations.
  • The emphasis on harmonization points toward possible joint research between vehicle manufacturers and cloud providers on shared threat models.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper conducts a systematic literature review (SLR) combined with an industry questionnaire across the automotive supply chain to analyze security and privacy issues in Software-Defined Vehicles (SDVs). Structured around four research questions, the work synthesizes findings into a proposed security framework intended as a roadmap, emphasizing mixed-criticality architectural challenges, layered security mechanisms, privacy-preserving techniques, and harmonization of in-vehicle and cloud-based defenses for improved cybersecurity and V2X resilience in Intelligent Transportation Systems.

Significance. If the SLR papers and questionnaire responses form a representative basis, the resulting framework could offer a useful synthesis of academic and industry perspectives on an emerging topic, providing a structured starting point for SDV protection strategies. The methodological combination of SLR and survey is standard and appropriate for contextualizing a fast-evolving domain.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract / Methods] Abstract and Methods (inferred from structure): No details are provided on search strategy, databases queried, search strings, inclusion/exclusion criteria, or number of papers screened/selected for the SLR. This directly undermines assessment of whether the synthesized framework rests on a complete and unbiased sample, as required for the central claim of a reliable roadmap.
  2. [Methods / Results] Questionnaire description (inferred from structure): The manuscript supplies no information on sample size, response rate, respondent demographics across supply-chain tiers, or analysis method for the industry responses. Without these, the claim that findings highlight the need to harmonize in-vehicle and cloud defenses cannot be evaluated for representativeness.
  3. [Framework / Discussion] Framework derivation (inferred from structure): The mapping from the four RQs and selected sources to the specific framework elements (mixed-criticality challenges, layered mechanisms, privacy techniques) is presented without explicit traceability or discussion of how contradictory or sparse evidence was handled, making the roadmap's grounding in the data unclear.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states the analysis 'results in a security framework' but does not preview the four RQs or the framework's structure, reducing immediate clarity for readers.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on methodological transparency. We address each major comment below and will incorporate revisions to strengthen the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / Methods] Abstract and Methods (inferred from structure): No details are provided on search strategy, databases queried, search strings, inclusion/exclusion criteria, or number of papers screened/selected for the SLR. This directly undermines assessment of whether the synthesized framework rests on a complete and unbiased sample, as required for the central claim of a reliable roadmap.

    Authors: We agree that the SLR protocol details were not sufficiently explicit. The revised manuscript will expand the Methods section with the full search strategy, queried databases (IEEE Xplore, ACM DL, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, Google Scholar), exact search strings, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and a PRISMA flow diagram reporting screened, eligible, and included papers. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Methods / Results] Questionnaire description (inferred from structure): The manuscript supplies no information on sample size, response rate, respondent demographics across supply-chain tiers, or analysis method for the industry responses. Without these, the claim that findings highlight the need to harmonize in-vehicle and cloud defenses cannot be evaluated for representativeness.

    Authors: We acknowledge the omission of questionnaire reporting details. The revision will add sample size, response rate, respondent demographics by supply-chain tier (OEMs, Tier-1/2 suppliers, software vendors), and the analysis approach (thematic coding of open responses) to enable evaluation of representativeness. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Framework / Discussion] Framework derivation (inferred from structure): The mapping from the four RQs and selected sources to the specific framework elements (mixed-criticality challenges, layered mechanisms, privacy techniques) is presented without explicit traceability or discussion of how contradictory or sparse evidence was handled, making the roadmap's grounding in the data unclear.

    Authors: We agree that traceability from RQs and sources to framework elements requires clarification. The revised Discussion will include a mapping table linking each framework component to specific RQs, literature citations, and survey responses, plus explicit discussion of how contradictory findings or sparse evidence were addressed (e.g., flagged as future research needs). revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: framework is explicit synthesis from external SLR and survey

full rationale

The paper performs a systematic literature review structured around four research questions plus an industry questionnaire, then synthesizes a security framework as a roadmap. No equations, fitted parameters, predictions, or derivations exist. The central claim is a qualitative synthesis whose validity rests on the completeness of the selected papers and responses (an external assumption, not a self-referential reduction). No self-citation chains, ansatzes, or renamings of known results are load-bearing for the framework itself. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 1 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The security framework is constructed via synthesis of reviewed literature and survey responses. No new free parameters, invented entities, or ad-hoc axioms are introduced beyond reliance on standard review methodology.

assumptions (1)
  • domain assumption Established methods for conducting systematic literature reviews and industry questionnaires are suitable for synthesizing security and privacy knowledge in the automotive domain.
    The paper invokes these methods without providing custom justification or deviations from standard practice.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Contextualizing Security and Privacy of Software-Defined Vehicles: A Literature Review and Industry Perspectives." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2411.10612

@misc{pith2026241110612,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Contextualizing Security and Privacy of Software-Defined Vehicles: A Literature Review and Industry Perspectives},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2411.10612}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.10612}
}
read the original abstract

The growing reliance on software in road vehicles has led to the emergence of Software-Defined Vehicles (SDV). This work analyzes SDV security and privacy through a systematic literature review complemented by an industry questionnaire across the automotive supply chain. The analysis is structured as four research questions and results in a security framework serving as a roadmap for SDV protection. The findings emphasize addressing mixed-criticality architectural challenges, deploying layered security mechanisms, and integrating privacy-preserving techniques. The results highlight the need to harmonize in-vehicle and cloud-based defenses to strengthen cybersecurity and V2X resilience in Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS).

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.10612 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Our review structure with the new software centric ecosystem with the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Literature review workflow schema. 2.2 Expert Elicitation IIn this paper, we used Expert Elicitation [25] to complement the literature review. While the review provided valuable insights, some aspects (e.g., RQ1 and RQ4) were underrepresented due to limited available resources. Expert Elicitation was chosen to fill these gaps by drawing on the specialized knowledge of domain experts, offering credible, detailed, and… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Experts’ answers for the definition section, where a rating of 1 indicates irrelevance and 5 indicates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Possible attack surfaces in SDV, including both legacy attack surfaces (S0-1, S0-2, and S0-3) and those specific to SDVs (S1-S6). • S3 - Supply-Chain Security: This involves vulnerabilities in both hardware [53] and soft￾ware components [74], including injecting malici…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The experts’ answers to the RQ1, where a rating of 1 indicates irrelevance and 5 indicates high relevance for SDV security. Criminals Activists States Competitors 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 9 0 0 9 27 20 27 27 27 20 45 36 18 20 9 27 18 40 18 Type of Threat Actor Percentage (%…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Expert responses on the relevance of various attackers for SDV. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The experts’ answers to RQ2, where a rating of 1 indicates irrelevance and 5 indicates high relevance for SDV security. ensuring that security is continuously monitored throughout the software lifecycle [85, 91]. Trust￾worthiness scores (M9) serve as a metric to evalua…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: OTA literature review outcomes. solutions on OTA updates for SDVs explores edge-based approaches, where, contrary to the cloud￾based approach, where the software is provided by a central entity, the update process is carried out in a distributed manner using the edge n…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Expert responses on the significance of security elements/properties in OTA updates. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Data collection and sanitization explained [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Experts’ answers on privacy and data collection for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Vehicular Communication Security: Multi-Channel and Multi-Factor Authentication

    cs.CR 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A vehicle-to-infrastructure authentication scheme adds a visible-light second factor: the car's headlights flash a 14-bit pattern that a SlowFast neural network decodes, with average test accuracy of 95 percent (RC ca...

  2. The Rise of the Software-Defined Vehicle: Architectures, Enabling Technologies, and Future Opportunities

    cs.ET 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 2.0 of 10

    A survey of software-defined vehicle architectures, enabling technologies including SDN and edge computing, a proposed taxonomy, and associated challenges.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

145 extracted references · 145 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Abualhoul, Oyunchimeg Shagdar, and Fawzi Nashashibi

    Mohammad Y. Abualhoul, Oyunchimeg Shagdar, and Fawzi Nashashibi. 2016. Visible Light inter-vehicle Com- munication for platooning of autonomous vehicles. In 2016 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV) . 508–513. https://doi.org/10.1109/IVS.2016.7535434

    work page doi:10.1109/ivs.2016.7535434 2016

  2. [2]

    Sam Abuelsamid. 2024. Stellantis Focuses On ABC As It Develops Software-Defined Vehicles. https://www.forbes. com/sites/samabuelsamid/2024/06/13/stellantis-focuses-on-abc-as-it-develops-software-defined-vehicles/. Last Contextualizing Security and Privacy of Software-Defined Vehicles: State of the Art and Industry Perspectives 29 accessed November 6, 2024

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    Accenture. 2022. Moving into the Software-Defined Vehicle Fast Lane. https://www.accenture.com/content/dam/ accenture/final/industry/mobility/document/Accenture-Software-Defined-Vehicles-pov.pdf, Last accessed November 6, 2024

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    ACM. 2024. ACM Digital Library. https://dl.acm.org/ Last accessed November 6, 2024

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Emad Aliwa, Omer Rana, Charith Perera, and Peter Burnap. 2021. Cyberattacks and Countermeasures for In-Vehicle Networks. ACM Comput. Surv. 54, 1, Article 21 (mar 2021), 37 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3431233

    work page doi:10.1145/3431233 2021

  6. [6]

    Allstate. 2024. Drivewise - Allstate. https://www.allstate.com/drive-wise/drivewise-device.aspx

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Allstate. 2024. Esurance Insurance Company. https://www.esurance.com/drivesense

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Daniel Arp, Erwin Quiring, Feargus Pendlebury, Alexander Warnecke, Fabio Pierazzi, Christian Wressnegger, Lorenzo Cavallaro, and Konrad Rieck. 2020. Dos and Don’ts of Machine Learning in Computer Security. CoRR abs/2010.09470 (2020). arXiv:2010.09470 https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.09470

    work page arXiv 2020

Show all 145 references
  1. [9]

    Nadarajah Asokan, Thomas Nyman, Norrathep Rattanavipanon, Ahmad-Reza Sadeghi, and Gene Tsudik. 2018. ASSURED: Architecture for secure software update of realistic embedded devices. IEEE Transactions on Computer- Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems 37, 11 (2018), 2290–2300

    2018

  2. [10]

    BBC. 2020. Trier: Five die as car ploughs through Germany pedestrian zone . https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe- 55148518 Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2020

  3. [11]

    Jan Becker. 2022. A Safety-Certified Automotive SDK to Enable Software-Defined Vehicles. InWorkshop Fahrerassistenz und automatisiertes Fahren. https://www.uni-das.de/images/pdf/fas-workshop/2022/FAS2022-12-Becker.pdf

    2022

  4. [12]

    Giampaolo Bella and Pietro Biondi. 2023. Car Drivers’ Privacy Awareness and Concerns. (09 2023). https://doi.org/ 10.13140/RG.2.2.14411.98080

    2023 doi

  5. [13]

    Arpan Bhattacharjee, Hamza Mahmood, Sidi Lu, Nejib Ammar, Akila Ganlath, and Weisong Shi. 2023. Edge-Assisted Over-the-Air Software Updates. In 2023 IEEE 9th International Conference on Collaboration and Internet Computing (CIC). IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, 1...

    2023 doi

  6. [14]

    Tommaso Bianchi, Alessandro Brighente, Mauro Conti, and Andrea Valori. 2024. Your Car Tells Me Where You Drove: A Novel Path Inference Attack via CAN Bus and OBD-II Data. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.00585 (2024)

    2024

  7. [15]

    David Blanco, Frédéric Le Mouël, Trista Lin, and Marie-Pierre Escudié. 2023. A Comprehensive Survey on Software as a Service (SaaS) Transformation for the Automotive Systems. IEEE Access PP (01 2023), 1–1. https://doi.org/10. 1109/ACCESS.2023.3294256

    2023

  8. [16]

    Chiara Bodei, Marco De Vincenzi, and Ilaria Matteucci. 2023. From Hardware-Functional to Software-Defined Vehicles and their Security Issues. In 2023 IEEE 21st International Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDIN) . 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1109/INDIN51400.2023.10217971

    2023 doi

  9. [17]

    Molly Boigon. 2024. Software-defined vehicles are all the rage. Too bad they don’t exist yet . https://www. autonews.com/mobility-report/software-defined-vehicles-will-require-supply-chain-and-revenue-strategy-shifts https://www.autonews.com/mobility-report/software-defined-ve...

    2024

  10. [18]

    Nick Bondaug-Winn. 2023. Understanding the Impact of Autonomous Vehicles on Insurance Agencies . https:// www.hbwleads.com/blog/understanding-the-impact-of-autonomous-vehicles-on-insurance-agencies/, Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2023

  11. [19]

    Andrew Booth, Anthea Sutton, and Diana Papaioannou. 2016. Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review . SAGE Publications. https://books.google.com/books?id=JD1DCgAAQBAJ

    2016

  12. [20]

    Bosch. 2023. Bosch software-defined vehicle. https://www.bosch-mobility.com/en/mobility-topics/software-defined- vehicle/. Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2023

  13. [21]

    Christoph Bösch, Benjamin Erb, Frank Kargl, Henning Kopp, and Stefan Pfattheicher. 2016. Tales from the dark side: Privacy dark strategies and privacy dark patterns. Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies (2016)

    2016

  14. [22]

    Siham Bouchelaghem, Abdelmadjid Bouabdallah, and Mawloud Omar. 2021. Autonomous Vehicle Security: Literature Review of Real Attack Experiments . 255–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68887-5_15

    2021 doi

  15. [23]

    Yulong Cao, Ningfei Wang, Chaowei Xiao, Dawei Yang, Jin Fang, Ruigang Yang, Qi Alfred Chen, Mingyan Liu, and Bo Li. 2021. Invisible for both Camera and LiDAR: Security of Multi-Sensor Fusion based Perception in Autonomous Driving Under Physical-World Attacks. In 2021 IEEE Symp...

    2021 doi

  16. [24]

    Miller Charlie and Valasek Chris. 2015. Remote Exploitation of an Unaltered Passenger Vehicle. https://illmatics. com/Remote%20Car%20Hacking.pdf Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2015

  17. [25]

    Abigail R Colson and Roger M Cooke. 2018. Expert elicitation: using the classical model to validate experts’ judgments . The University of Chicago Press

    2018

  18. [26]

    Cookiebot. 2020. California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA): CCPA VS CPRA. https://www.cookiebot.com/en/cpra/ Last accessed November 6, 2024. 30 De Vincenzi et al

    2020

  19. [27]

    Renesas Electronics Corporation. 2024. The Art of Networking Series 9: SDN - The Next Hype after Automotive Ethernet? https://www.renesas.com/en/blogs/art-networking-series-9-sdn-next-hype-after-automotive-ethernet, Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  20. [28]

    Gianpiero Costantino, Marco De Vincenzi, and Ilaria Matteucci. 2024. A vehicle firmware security vulnerability: an IVI exploitation. J. Comput. Virol. Hacking Tech. 20, 4 (2024), 681–696. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11416-024-00522-4

    2024 doi

  21. [29]

    Sam Curry. 2024. Hacking Kia: Remotely Controlling Cars With Just a License Plate . https://samcurry.net/hacking-kia, Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  22. [30]

    Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). 2022. Vehicle Ramming: Security Awareness for Soft Targets and Crowded Places. https://www.cisa.gov, Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2022

  23. [31]

    National Vulnerability Database. 2023. CVE-2023-1709: Vulnerability in [Vulnerable Product/Component]. https: //nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-1709 Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2023

  24. [32]

    Marco De Vincenzi, Chiara Bodei, and Ilaria Matteucci. 2023. Securing Automotive Ethernet: Design and Imple- mentation of Security Data Link Solutions. In 2023 20th ACS/IEEE International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications (AICCSA). 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1109/AI...

    2023 doi

  25. [33]

    Marco De Vincenzi, Gianpiero Costantino, Ilaria Matteucci, Florian Fenzl, Christian Plappert, Roland Rieke, and Daniel Zelle. 2024. A Systematic Review on Security Attacks and Countermeasures in Automotive Ethernet. ACM Comput. Surv. 56, 6, Article 135 (Jan. 2024), 38 pages. h...

    2024 doi

  26. [34]

    Deloitte. 2023. Software-defined Vehicles. https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/consumer-business/articles/the- software-defined-vehicle-revolution.html. Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2023

  27. [35]

    GM Developers. 2024. GM Developers. https://developer.gm.com/in-vehicle-apps Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  28. [36]

    Rinku Dewri, Prasad Annadata, Wisam Eltarjaman, and Ramakrishna Thurimella. 2013. Inferring trip destinations from driving habits data. In Proc. of the 12th ACM workshop on Workshop on privacy in the electronic society . 267–272

    2013

  29. [37]

    Eaton. 2023. Toyota C360 Hack. https://eaton-works.com/2023/03/06/toyota-c360-hack/. Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2023

  30. [38]

    Aya El-Fatyany, Xiaohang Wang, Parasara Duggirala, Samarjit Chakraborty, Sudeep Pasricha, and Amit Singh. 2024. Special Session: Emerging Architecture Design, Control, and Security Challenges in Software Defined Vehicles

    2024

  31. [39]

    William Enck, Damien Octeau, Patrick D McDaniel, and Swarat Chaudhuri. 2011. A study of android application security.. In USENIX security symposium, Vol. 2

    2011

  32. [40]

    Miro Enev, Alex Takakuwa, Karl Koscher, and Tadayoshi Kohno. 2016. Automobile driver fingerprinting. Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies (2016)

    2016

  33. [41]

    European Parliament and Council of the European Union. 2016. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and r...

    2016

  34. [42]

    Saad Ezzini, Ismail Berrada, and Mounir Ghogho. 2018. Who is behind the wheel? Driver identification and finger- printing. Journal of Big Data 5, 1 (2018), 1–15

    2018

  35. [43]

    State Farm. 2018. Drive Safe & Save™ – State Farm®. https://www.statefarm.com/insurance/auto/discounts/drive- safe-save, Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2018

  36. [44]

    Ford. 2024. Ford Developer Marketplace. https://developer.ford.com/infotainment/in-vehicle-downloadable-apps Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  37. [45]

    Mozilla Foundation. 2023. ‘Privacy Nightmare on Wheels’. https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/privacy-nightmare- on-wheels-every-car-brand-reviewed-by-mozilla-including-ford-volkswagen-and-toyota-flunks-privacy-test Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2023

  38. [46]

    Xianyi Gao, Bernhard Firner, Shridatt Sugrim, Victor Kaiser-Pendergrast, Yulong Yang, and Janne Lindqvist. 2014. Elastic pathing: Your speed is enough to track you. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM international joint conference on pervasive and ubiquitous computing . 975–986

    2014

  39. [47]

    András Gazdag, Szilvia Lestyán, Mina Remeli, Gergely Ács, Tamás Holczer, and Gergely Biczók. 2023. Privacy pitfalls of releasing in-vehicle network data. Vehicular Communications 39 (2023), 100565

    2023

  40. [48]

    Amrita Ghosal and Mauro Conti. 2020. Security issues and challenges in V2X: A survey. Computer Networks 169 (2020), 107093

    2020

  41. [49]

    GlobeNewsWire. 2019. Daimler Partners with Otonomo to Provide Connected Car Customers with New Services while Delivering on the Promise of Data Privacy. https://www.globenewswire.com/news- release/2019/01/10/1685883/0/en/UPDATED-Daimler-Partners-with-Otonomo-to-Provide-Connect...

    2019

  42. [50]

    Google Scholar. 2024. Google Scholar. https://scholar.google.com/ Last accessed November 6, 2024. Contextualizing Security and Privacy of Software-Defined Vehicles: State of the Art and Industry Perspectives 31

    2024

  43. [51]

    Colin M Gray, Yubo Kou, Bryan Battles, Joseph Hoggatt, and Austin L Toombs. 2018. The dark (patterns) side of UX design. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems . 1–14

    2018

  44. [52]

    BMW Group. 2017. BMW Group launches BMW CarData: new and innovative services for customers, safely and transparently. https://www.press.bmwgroup.com/global/article/detail/T0271366EN/bmw-group-launches- bmw-cardata:-new-and-innovative-services-for-customers-safely-and-transpare...

    2017

  45. [53]

    Ujjwal Guin, Ke Huang, Daniel DiMase, John M Carulli, Mohammad Tehranipoor, and Yiorgos Makris. 2014. Counter- feit integrated circuits: A rising threat in the global semiconductor supply chain. Proc. IEEE 102, 8 (2014), 1207–1228

    2014

  46. [54]

    Subir Halder, Amrita Ghosal, and Mauro Conti. 2020. Secure over-the-air software updates in connected vehicles: A survey. Computer Networks 178 (2020), 107343

    2020

  47. [55]

    Mohammad Hamad and Vassilis Prevelakis. 2017. Secure APIs for Applications in Microkernel-based Systems. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Information Systems Security and Privacy - Volume 1: ICISSP,. INSTICC, SciTePress, 553–558. https://doi.org/10.5220/00...

    2017 doi

  48. [56]

    Mohammad Hamad and Vassilis Prevelakis. 2020. SAVTA: A hybrid vehicular threat model: Overview and case study. Information 11, 5 (2020), 273

    2020

  49. [57]

    Mona Helmy and Mohamed Mahmoud. 2023. Enhanced Multi-Level Secure Over-the-Air Update System using Adaptive AUTOSAR. In 2023 International Conference on Computer and Applications (ICCA) . 1–4. https://doi.org/10. 1109/ICCA59364.2023.10401797

    2023

  50. [58]

    Kashmir Hill. 2024. General Motors quits sharing driving behavior with data brokers. https://www.nytimes.com/ 2024/03/22/technology/gm-onstar-driver-data.html

    2024

  51. [59]

    Kashmir Hill. 2024. How G.M. Tricked Millions of Drivers Into Being Spied On (Including Me). N.Y. Times (April 2024). https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/23/technology/general-motors-spying-driver-data-consent.html

    2024

  52. [60]

    Honda. 2024. Honda Vehicles with Google built-in. https://automobiles.honda.com/google-built-in Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  53. [61]

    Lois Hoyal. 2024. Automakers forecast to earn tenfold more revenue from digital services. https://europe.autonews. com/automakers/why-software-defined-vehicles-offer-big-profit-potential, Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  54. [62]

    Jeremy Hsu. 2014. Toyota recalls 1.9 million prius hybrids over software flaw. IEEE Spectrum, Feb (2014)

    2014

  55. [63]

    IBM. 2023. The Software Defined Vehicle - IBM Blog - Digitale Perspektive. https://www.ibm.com/blogs/digitale- perspektive/2023/06/the-software-defined-vehicle/. Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2023

  56. [64]

    IEEEXplore. 2024. IEEE Xplore Library. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/home.jsp Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  57. [65]

    ISO. 2021. Road vehicles — Functional safety . Standard ISO 26262:2018. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, CH. https://www.iso.org/standard/68383.html

    2021

  58. [66]

    ISO. 2021. Road vehicles — Cybersecurity engineering . Standard ISO/SAE FDIS 21434:2021 Ed.1. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, CH. https://www.iso.org/standard/70918.html

    2021

  59. [67]

    Japan Today. 2019. 8 injured as man rams car into pedestrians in Harajuku in ’retaliation for exe- cution’. https://japantoday.com/category/crime/8-injured-as-man-rams-car-into-pedestrians-in-Harajuku-in- %27retaliation-for-execution%27 Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2019

  60. [68]

    Boosun Jeon, Hongil Ju, Boheung Jung, Kyungtae Kim, and Duyeon Lee. 2019. A Study on Traffic Characteristics for Anomaly Detection of Ethernet-based IVN. In 2019 International Conference on Information and Communication Technology Convergence (ICTC). 951–953. https://doi.org/1...

    2019 doi

  61. [69]

    Gorkem Kar, Shubham Jain, Marco Gruteser, Jinzhu Chen, Fan Bai, and Ramesh Govindan. 2017. PredriveID: Pre-trip driver identification from in-vehicle data. In Proc. of the Second ACM/IEEE Symposium on Edge Computing . 1–12

    2017

  62. [70]

    Kaspersky. 2024. Kaspersky survey: 71% of drivers would buy a car with less tech to protect their pri- vacy. https://usa.kaspersky.com/about/press-releases/2024_kaspersky-survey-71-of-drivers-would-buy-a-car- with-less-tech-to-protect-their-privacy Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  63. [71]

    Pearse Keane. 2024. The Software-Defined Vehicle: Impacts Across the Automotive Ecosystem . Jabil. https://www.jabil. com/blog/software-defined-vehicle.html, Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  64. [72]

    Casper Kessels. 2024. The state of Android Automotive in 2024 - Snapp Automotive. https://www.snappautomotive. io/blog/the-state-of-android-automotive-in-2024 Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  65. [73]

    Patrick Kingsley, Euan Ward, Ronen Bergman, and Michael Levenson. 2024. Exploding Pagers Targeting Hezbollah Kill 11 and Wound Thousands . https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/17/world/middleeast/hezbollah-pager-explosions- lebanon.html, Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  66. [74]

    Piergiorgio Ladisa, Henrik Plate, Matias Martinez, and Olivier Barais. 2023. SoK: Taxonomy of Attacks on Open-Source Software Supply Chains. In 2023 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP) . 1509–1526. https://doi.org/10.1109/ SP46215.2023.10179304

    2023

  67. [75]

    Brooke Lampe and Weizhi Meng. 2023. Intrusion Detection in the Automotive Domain: A Comprehensive Review. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials 25, 4 (2023), 2356–2426. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2023.3309864 32 De Vincenzi et al

    2023 doi

  68. [76]

    Aljoscha Lautenbach, Magnus Almgren, and Tomas Olovsson. 2021. Proposing HEAVENS 2.0–an automotive risk assessment model. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM Computer Science in Cars Symposium . 1–12

    2021

  69. [78]

    Namcheol Lee, Seongsoo Hong, and Saehwa Kim. 2024. Dynamic Mapping of Mixed-Criticality Applications onto a Mixed-Criticality Runtime System with Probabilistic Guarantees. In 2024 IEEE 44th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS) . IEEE, 1466–1467

    2024

  70. [79]

    Ninghui Li, Tiancheng Li, and Suresh Venkatasubramanian. 2007. t-Closeness: Privacy Beyond k-Anonymity and l-Diversity. In 2007 IEEE 23rd International Conference on Data Engineering . 106–115. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDE. 2007.367856

    2007 doi

  71. [80]

    Zongwei Liu, Wang Zhang, and Fuquan Zhao. 2018. Security and privacy for innovative automotive applications: A survey. Computer Communications 5 (2018), 17–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comcom.2018.09.010

    2018 doi

  72. [82]

    Zongwei Liu, Wang Zhang, and Fuquan Zhao. 2022. Impact, Challenges and Prospect of Software-Defined Vehicles. Automotive Innovation 5 (2022), 180–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42154-022-00179-z

    2022 doi

  73. [83]

    Garikayi Madzudzo and Madeline Cheah. 2020. Data Protection and Connected Vehicles: Privacy Policy Analysis from a Consumer Perspective. (November 2020). https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.28097.17769

    2020 doi

  74. [84]

    Rahman, Arsalan Ahmad, and Max Mauro Dias Santos

    Asad Waqar Malik, Anis U. Rahman, Arsalan Ahmad, and Max Mauro Dias Santos. 2022. Over-the-Air Software- Defined Vehicle Updates Using Federated Fog Environment. IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management 19, 4 (2022), 5078–5089. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNSM.2022.3181027

    2022 doi

  75. [86]

    Stefan F Marksteiner, Christoph Schmittner, Korbinian Christl, Dejan Nickovic, Mikael Sjödin, and Marjan Sirjani. 2023. From TARA to Test: Automated Automotive Cybersecurity Test Generation Out of Threat Modeling. InProceedings of the 7th ACM Computer Science in Cars Symposium...

    2023 doi

  76. [87]

    Matt McFarland, CNN business. 2022. Teen’s Tesla hack shows how vulnerable third-party apps may make cars. https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/02/cars/tesla-teen-hack/index.html. Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2022

  77. [88]

    Rani Molla. 2024. How to opt out of the privacy nightmare that comes with new Hondas. Sherwood News (May 2024). https://sherwood.news/tech/how-to-opt-out-of-the-privacy-nightmare-that-comes-factory-installed-in-new

    2024

  78. [89]

    Jean-Philippe Monteuuis, Aymen Boudguiga, Jun Zhang, Houda Labiod, Alain Servel, and Pascal Urien. 2018. Sara: Security automotive risk analysis method. In Proc. of the 4th ACM Workshop on Cyber-Physical System Security . 3–14

    2018

  79. [91]

    Moukahal, Mohammad Zulkernine, and Martin Soukup

    Lama J. Moukahal, Mohammad Zulkernine, and Martin Soukup. 2021. Towards a Secure Software Lifecycle for Autonomous Vehicles. In 2021 IEEE International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering Workshops (ISSREW) . 371–377. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISSREW53611.2021.00104

    2021 doi

  80. [92]

    National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). 2023. Automated Vehicles for Safety | NHTSA. https: //www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle-safety/automated-vehicles-safety. Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2023

  81. [93]

    Boel Nelson and Tomas Olovsson. 2017. Introducing Differential Privacy to the Automotive Domain: Opportunities and Challenges. In 2017 IEEE 86th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC-Fall) . 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/VTCFall. 2017.8288389

    2017 doi

  82. [94]

    Boel Nelson and Tomas Olovsson. 2017. Introducing differential privacy to the automotive domain: Opportunities and challenges. In 2017 IEEE 86th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC-Fall) . IEEE, 1–7

    2017

  83. [95]

    Governor of California. 2018. Basics of the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018. https://www.privacypolicies. com/blog/california-consumer-privacy-act/

    2018

  84. [96]

    Dennis Kengo Oka. 2021. Building secure cars: assuring the automotive software development lifecycle . John Wiley & Sons

    2021

  85. [97]

    Akash Pallath and Qiyang Zhang. 2023. Paperfetcher: A tool to automate handsearching and citation searching for systematic reviews. Res. Synth. Methods 14, 2 (March 2023), 323–335. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1604

    2023 doi

  86. [98]

    Fengjunjie Pan, Jianjie Lin, Markus Rickert, and Alois Knoll. 2022. Resource Allocation in Software-Defined Vehicles: ILP Model Formulation and Solver Evaluation. In 2022 IEEE 25th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC). 2577–2584. https://doi.or...

    2022 doi

  87. [99]

    Mert D Pese. 2023. A first look at android automotive privacy . Technical Report. SAE Technical Paper

    2023

  88. [100]

    Mert D Pesé, Xiaoying Pu, and Kang G Shin. 2020. Spy: Car steering reveals your trip route! Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies (2020)

    2020

  89. [101]

    Mert D Pesé, Jay W Schauer, Murali Mohan, Cassandra Joseph, Kang G Shin, and John Moore. 2023. PRICAR: Privacy Framework for Vehicular Data Sharing with Third Parties. In2023 IEEE Secure Development Conference (SecDev) . IEEE, 184–195

    2023

  90. [102]

    Mert D Pesé and Kang G Shin. 2019. Survey of automotive privacy regulations and privacy-related attacks. (2019)

    2019

  91. [103]

    Christian Plappert, Florian Fenzl, Roland Rieke, Ilaria Matteucci, Gianpiero Costantino, and Marco De Vincenzi. 2022. SECPAT: Security Patterns for Resilient Automotive E / E Architectures. In2022 30th Euromicro International Conference on Parallel, Distributed and Network-bas...

    2022 doi

  92. [104]

    Christian Plappert, Daniel Zelle, Christoph Krauß, Benjamin Lange, Sebastian Mauthofer, Jonas Walter, Bettina Abendroth, Rasmus Robrahn, Thilo von Pape, and Hendrik Decke. 2023. A privacy-aware data access system for automotive applications. (2023)

    2023

  93. [105]

    Sebastian Poeplau, Yanick Fratantonio, Antonio Bianchi, Christopher Kruegel, and Giovanni Vigna. 2014. Execute this! Analyzing unsafe and malicious dynamic code loading in android applications. In NDSS, Vol. 14. 23–26

    2014

  94. [106]

    Vassilis Prevelakis and Mohammad Hamad. 2015. A policy-based communications architecture for vehicles. In 2015 International Conference on Information Systems Security and Privacy (ICISSP) . IEEE, 155–162

    2015

  95. [107]

    Progressive. 2024. What is Snapshot and How You Can Save. https://www.progressive.com/auto/discounts/snapshot/

    2024

  96. [108]

    Shatad Purohit, Ayesha Madni, Arun Adiththan, and Azad M. Madni. 2023. Digital Twin Integration for Software Defined Vehicles: Decoupling Hardware and Software in Automotive System Development. In2023 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC) . 1259–...

    2023 doi

  97. [109]

    Omar Al-Kadri, Andrei Petrovski, Garikayi Madzudzo, and Madeline Cheah

    Sampath Rajapaksha, Harsha Kalutarage, M. Omar Al-Kadri, Andrei Petrovski, Garikayi Madzudzo, and Madeline Cheah. 2023. AI-Based Intrusion Detection Systems for In-Vehicle Networks: A Survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 55, 11, Article 237 (Feb. 2023), 40 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3570954

    2023 doi

  98. [110]

    Research Gate. 2024. Research Gate. https://www.researchgate.net/ Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  99. [111]

    Caleb Riggs, Carl-Edwin Rigaud, Robert Beard, Tanner Douglas, and Karim Elish. 2018. A Survey on Connected Vehicles Vulnerabilities and Countermeasures. Journal of Traffic and Logistics Engineering (01 2018), 11–16. https: //doi.org/10.18178/jtle.6.1.11-16

    2018 doi

  100. [112]

    Marcel Rumez, Daniel Grimm, Reiner Kriesten, and Eric Sax. 2020. An overview of automotive service-oriented architectures and implications for security countermeasures. IEEE access 8 (2020), 221852–221870

    2020

  101. [113]

    Lu S., Ammar N., Ganlath A., Wang H., and Shi W. 2022. A Comparison of End-to-End Architectures for Connected Vehicles. In Proceedings - 2022 5th International Conference on Connected and Autonomous Driving, MetroCAD 2022 . SOAFEE, 72–80. https://doi.org/10.1109/MetroCAD56305....

    2022 doi

  102. [114]

    Etienne Sapin, Suraj Menon, Jingquan Ge, Sheikh Mahbub Habib, Maurice Heymann, Yuekang Li, Rene Palige, Gabriel Byman, and Yang Liu. 2023. Monitoring Automotive Software Security Health through Trustworthiness Score. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM Computer Science in Cars Sympo...

    2023 doi

  103. [115]

    Ankur Sarker, Haiying Shen, Chenxi Qiu, Hua Uehara, and Kevin Zhang. 2023. Brake-Signal-Based Driver’s Location Tracking in Usage-Based Auto Insurance Programs. IEEE Internet of Things Journal 10, 12 (2023), 10172–10189

    2023

  104. [116]

    Satori. 2022. Data Anonymization: Use Cases and 6 common techniques. https://satoricyber.com/data-masking/data- anonymization-use-cases-and-6-common-techniques/ Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2022

  105. [117]

    Science Direct. 2024. Science Direct Library. https://www.sciencedirect.com/ Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  106. [118]

    Upstream Security. 2024. Global Automotive Cybersecurity Report. https://upstream.auto/reports/global-automotive- cybersecurity-report/. Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  107. [119]

    Eunbi Seo, Hyun Min Song, and Huy Kang Kim. 2018. GIDS: GAN based Intrusion Detection System for In-Vehicle Network. In 2018 16th Annual Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust (PST) . 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/PST.2018. 8514157

    2018 doi

  108. [120]

    Girish Shirasat and Stefano Marzani. 2024. Accelerating software-defined vehicles through cloud-to-vehicle edge environmental parity. In aws for automotive. SOAFEE. https://doi.org/developer/Files/pdf/white-paper/arm-aws- edge-environmental-parity-wp.pdf Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  109. [121]

    Dirk Slama, Achim Nonnenmacher, and Thomas Irawan. 2023. The Software-Defined Vehicle: A Digital- First Approach to Creating Next-Generation Experiences . O’Reilly. https://www.digital.auto/_files/ugd/87c677_ 1851f6f1af6a4752a3c038038e70f222.pdf Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2023

  110. [122]

    Suzanne Smalley. 2024. Insurer unveils policy covering drivers from connected car hacks and data leaks . https: //therecord.media/insurer-introduces-policy-covering-drivers-from-connected-car-hacks, Last accessed November 6, 2024. 34 De Vincenzi et al

    2024

  111. [123]

    Fedor Smirnov, Felix Reimann, Jürgen Teich, and Michael Glaß. 2018. Automatic Optimization of the VLAN Partitioning in Automotive Communication Networks. ACM Trans. Des. Autom. Electron. Syst. 24, 1, Article 9 (Dec. 2018), 23 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3278120

    2018 doi

  112. [124]

    Ian Smith. 2024. Insurance groups urge state support for ‘uninsurable’ cyber risks. Financial Times (sep 2024). https://www.ft.com/content/c2769c6d-8bec-4167-af5c-53c6cf139851, Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  113. [125]

    Jama Software. 2023. Software Defined Vehicles: Revolutionizing the Future of Transportation . White Pa- per. Jama. https://www.jamasoftware.com/whitepaper/software-defined-vehicles-revolutionizing-the-future-of- transportation-whitepaper Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2023

  114. [126]

    Springer Link. 2024. Springer Link Library. https://link.springer.com/ Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  115. [127]

    Kanhere, Kay Römer, Raja Jurdak, and Michael Karner

    Marco Steger, Ali Dorri, Salil S. Kanhere, Kay Römer, Raja Jurdak, and Michael Karner. 2018. Secure Wireless Automotive Software Updates Using Blockchains: A Proof of Concept. In Advanced Microsystems for Automotive Applications 2017, Carolin Zachäus, Beate Müller, and Gereon ...

    2018

  116. [128]

    Latanya Sweeney. 2002. k-anonymity: a model for protecting privacy. Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl.-Based Syst. 10, 5 (Oct. 2002), 557–570. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488502001648

    2002 doi

  117. [129]

    Karthik and D

    Kuppusamy T. Karthik and D. McCoy. 2016. Uptane: Securing Software Updates for Automobiles. Presented at the ESCARE Europe, 2016

    2016

  118. [130]

    Pedro Veloso Teixeira, Duarte Raposo, Rui Lopes, and Susana Sargento. 2024. Software Defined Vehicles for Develop- ment of Deterministic Services. arXiv:2407.17287 [cs.DC] https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.17287

    2024

  119. [131]

    Tencent Keen Security Lab. 2018. New Vehicle Security Research by KeenLab: Experimental Security Assessment of BMW Cars. https://keenlab.tencent.com/en/2018/05/22/New-CarHacking-Research-by-KeenLab-Experimental-Security- Assessment-of-BMW-Cars/, Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2018

  120. [132]

    The Guardian. 2023. Nine injured in Tel A viv ramming and stabbing attack. https://www.theguardian.com/world/ 2023/jul/04/seven-injured-in-tel-aviv-ramming-and-stabbing-attack Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2023

  121. [133]

    Towards Automotive. 2024. Software Defined Vehicles Market Size, Share, Analysis. https://www.towardsautomotive. com/insights/software-defined-vehicles-market-sizing. Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  122. [134]

    UNECE. 2021. Uniform provisions concerning the approval of vehicles with regards to software update and software updates management system. Regulation Addendum 155 – UN Regulation No. 156. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, Geneva, CH. https://unece.org/sites/defau...

    2021

  123. [135]

    UNECE. 2021. Uniform provisions concerning the approval of vehicles with regards to cyber security and cyber security management system. Regulation Addendum 154 – UN Regulation No. 155. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, Geneva, CH. https://unece.org/sites/default/...

    2021

  124. [136]

    Department of Transportation

    U.S. Department of Transportation. 2020. How Connected Vehicles Work. https://www.transportation.gov/research- and-technology/how-connected-vehicles-work. Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2020

  125. [137]

    Sherin Kalli Valappil, Lars Vogel, Mohammad Hamad, and Sebastian Steinhorst. 2024. Advanced IDPS Architecture for Connected and Autonomous Vehicles. In 2024 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV) . 1779–1785. https: //doi.org/10.1109/IV55156.2024.10588659

    2024 doi

  126. [138]

    Volvo. 2024. Discover Volvo with Google Assistant, Google Maps and Google Play built in | Volvo Cars. https: //www.volvocars.com/intl/v/connectivity/infotainment-page Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  127. [139]

    Marian Waltereit, Maximilian Uphoff, and Torben Weis. 2019. Route derivation using distances and turn directions. In Proceedings of the ACM Workshop on Automotive Cybersecurity . 35–40

    2019

  128. [140]

    Bo Wang, Smruti Panigrahi, Mayur Narsude, and Amit Mohanty. 2017. Driver identification using vehicle telematics data. Technical Report. SAE Technical Paper

    2017

  129. [141]

    Bao-Fu Wu, Ren Zhong, Yuxin Wang, Jian Wan, Ji-Lin Zhang, and Weisong Shi. 2024. Vpi: Vehicle programming interface for vehicle computing. Journal of Computer Science and Technology 39, 1 (2024), 22–44

    2024

  130. [142]

    Oded Yarkoni. 2024. What Does the GDPR Have to Do with Car OEMs? https://upstream.auto/blog/gdpr/, Last accessed November 6, 2024

    2024

  131. [143]

    Sadia Yeasmin and Anwar Haque. 2021. A Multi-Factor Authenticated Blockchain-Based OTA Update Framework for Connected Autonomous Vehicles. In 2021 IEEE 94th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2021-Fall) . 1–6. https: //doi.org/10.1109/VTC2021-Fall52928.2021.9625372

    2021 doi

  132. [144]

    Longhai Yu, Xudong Bian, Yuqiao Ning, and Zhen Guo. 2023. Software Security Analysis for Automotive Intelligent Cockpits. IOS Press. https://doi.org/10.3233/ATDE230577

    2023 doi

  133. [145]

    Fuquan Zhao, Haokun Song, and Zongwei Liu. 2022. Identification and Analysis of Key Technical Elements and Prospects for Software-Defined Vehicles. In SAE 2021 Intelligent and Connected Vehicles Symposium (ICVS 2021) . SAE Technical papers. https://doi.org/10.4271/2022-01-7002

    2022 doi

  134. [146]

    Jingyuan Zhao, Wenyi Zhao, Bo Deng, Zhenghong Wang, Feng Zhang, Wenxiang Zheng, Wanke Cao, Jinrui Nan, Yubo Lian, and Andrew F. Burke. 2024. Autonomous driving system: A comprehensive survey. Expert Systems with Contextualizing Security and Privacy of Software-Defined Vehicles...

    2024 doi

  135. [147]

    Rui Zhao, Guihe Qin, Ying Lyu, and Jie Yan. 2019. Security-Aware Scheduling for TTEthernet-Based Real-Time Automotive Systems. IEEE Access 7 (2019), 85971–85984. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2926113

    2019 doi

  136. [148]

    Lu Zhou, Qingrong Chen, Zutian Luo, Haojin Zhu, and Cailian Chen. 2017. Speed-based location tracking in usage- based automotive insurance. In 2017 IEEE 37th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS) . IEEE, 2252–2257

    2017

  137. [149]

    Lu Zhou, Suguo Du, Haojin Zhu, Cailian Chen, Kaoru Ota, and Mianxiong Dong. 2018. Location privacy in usage-based automotive insurance: Attacks and countermeasures. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 14, 1 (2018), 196–211

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed May 23, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.