California’s Bureau of Automotive Repair is proposing a new rule which could drastically limit the effectiveness of smog checks:
The California Air Resources Board and the state Bureau of Automotive Repair want to make the most far-reaching changes to the smog check program in at least a decade. Under the measure, any California motorist with a 1996 or newer vehicle would no longer be required to pass a tailpipe emissions test or a treadmill test. Instead, every two years when the vehicle is due for a smog inspection, a technician would hook up a meter to a port under the dashboard and download data from the vehicle’s computerized onboard diagnostic system.
Instead of measuring actual tailpipe emissions, technicians would merely see if the “check engine” light has come on. Pretty sweet deal for manufacturers of engine code readers, but not so good for the environment.
Using $50 code reader, it is trivial to clear engine codes. Tampering with engine sensors and electronics isn’t that difficult either.
And even if the electronics are working properly, they only catch certain problems. For example, my car had a failing EGR valve, but no check-engine light ever came on.
The $50 code readers will allow you to clear codes. This does not defeat a modern emissions test based on OBD. Cars today track when the codes are cleared so a modern emissions test based on OBD technology will know when the codes are cleared. In addition, a car also maintains a readiness status which are indicators that tell whether the car has performed the required tests to know if its emissions components are working properly. If a fault exists in the emissions components when these tests are done, the check engine light is reset. Any modern emissions test will prevent the car from being inspected prior to these readiness monitors being set. Therefore, the test prevents the cheating described. Its actually not a good deal for the emissions testing companies and code reader companies because the same companies which typically sell the code readers also sell emissions testing equipment. They make way more money selling $40,000 emissions analyzers then they do small code readers. It is true that occasionally cars will miss an emissions failure but statistically its a very small number and results in little to know additional environmental pollution. The year mentioned for the car, 1996, was the first year the OBD standard was required in the cars so it is also more likely that those first few years vehicles may have issues.
You’re off-base here.
The proposal will likely 1) reduce fraud, 2) save consumers money, 3) help restore public confidence in the smog check program.
There are still details to be worked out, but this legislation holds great promise.
Don’t see how this scheme reduces fraud. What (if any) measures are in place to to prevent a classic Man-in-the-Middle hack?
For example: a car owner, who does not wish to pay for new catalytic converter, diverts the OBDII port to a laptop computer hidden in the car. The laptop runs program he bought off the internet, which outputs correct OMDBII signals, giving the appearance of a correctly functioning emissions system.
Man’s ingenuity and occasional desire to push the limits of what one can get away will inspire some to go to lengths such as you describe, but your particular scenario is a bit far-fetched in that few people satisy all the following conditions assumed therein:
1) willing to commit fraud
2) able to afford a laptop
3) capable of using a laptop with required accessories
4) able to locate and download program, willing to risk being traced
5) willing to spend money for all this
6) weighs cash expenses and possible criminal sanctions and shame versues costs of compliance and still goes forward.
Some, but not many people will satisfy those conditions. It’s clear that the current system is rife with fraud.
But let me make clear. I respect your technical expertise– and defer to it– and will fully consider your remarks. In fact, feel free to suggest other ways in which you believe the proposal is flawed adn could be improved. But it’s pretty clear we’re headed towards OBDII testing.
All of the measures in my first post have been proven to drastically reduce fraud. Addressing the man in the middle hack is a little more difficult but not really a big challenge in a good inspection program like the ones run by BAR in California.
First off, the man in the middle hack simply isnt a real scenario. In most emissions tests, car owners do not conduct their own tests. Licensed trained technicians conduct the tests.
The car owner using a lap top to hack the signal could work on a one time basis. Since the vehicle inspections are normally conducted by a trained inspector, the car owner would have to want to cheat and so would the inspector.
Next, the data from OBDII emissions tests is very consistent for failure rates. So, the states normally monitor the data and would be able to statisically find any trained inspectors who would be passing lots of vehicles that should fail.
States also run undercover audits to find inspectors who cheat. It does happen occassionally that inspectors are caught cheating but rarely. They know they could be caught so this is very effective at reducing fraud
There are also many other methods used to prevent fraud in good inspection programs but it is like any other computer system and fraud will always be possible. With a modern inspection program that combines technology with effective monitoring it is almost always a very insignificant number.
Finally, for the cost, a lot of people who might want to cheat might be better off paying to have their car fixed because their check engine light is on for a reason.
No offense meant and unless I am missing something – can I assume in the post out here
OMDBII
really was meant to be OBDII or OBD2 ?
its all money making bullshit.
As a licensed smog tech for 20+ years (you know – the guy running the test on your car at the smog place) I will say that this proposal will never fly in a million years.
OBDII checks that are conducted while plugging a code reader or scan tool into the data link connector (DLC) under the dash are merely a “snapshot” of the car’s computer data values collected by various sensors on the vehicle.
Every OBDII vehicle (’96 and newer) has “readiness monitors” that can only be completed after certain conditions have been met. So in order for the monitors (another name for’self tests’) to run, certain conditions called ‘enabling criteria’ must be present and the vehicle must complete a set number of drive cycles to complete each monitor according to a set of predetermined parameters.
Sound confusing? It is!
The important thing to rememer is that no codes can accurately be obtained from the car’s computer without completing the readiness monitors. If you attempted to do read the codes without all the car’s monitors being complete, you would get an inaccurate code read.
Note: this is why a car will still fail the smog test even if the it passes everything else and even when the malfunction indicator lamp (MIL – aka “check engine” or “service engine soon” or “PGMFI” for Honda) is off. This happens when, for example, a car has a dead battery and then tries to get a smog check without driving it through several drive cycles.
But people who use those $50 code readers to “shut the check engine light off to pass the smog check” are ususally in for a surprise! It will still fail if more than 2 monitors are incomplete. Once they do complete, the light will come right back on for the same reason as it was on before – if the car is not fixed.
The other reason why the proposal will get poo-pooed is becuase no vehicle’s computer system can monitor HC, CO or NOX – the three primary ingredients to photochemical smog. The computer can only measure oxygen (O2) content in the exhaust, which can only approximate the three harmful smog gases at best, But this can only do so under certain controlled driving conditions, and not dynamically while the vehicle is going down the road.
I agree that the change in the program will be a degrading one. California is known as a leader in smog reduction because of the Bureau of Automotive Repair’s Smog Check program. This time it is the Air Resources Board (ARB) that is pushing this change. I haven’t been impressed with changes the ARB made over the last few years. It seems to me that they must do something to justify their existence. Cheating and fraud will not stop and the air will not get cleaner.
After playing with electronics and programmable IC’s for about three years, I built my own scantool. It was more of a challenge to myself to see if I could do it. I know for a fact that I could build a box that the vehicle’s OBDII connector could be plugged into and the cable from the box could be put in the original place of the OBDII connector. A technician doing the scan wouldn’t know the difference. The box would then communicate with the vehicle’s computer and wait for data request from the input cable (the smog equipment). The smog equipment would ask for the VIN, no problem, the box would request the VIN and send the VIN data out to the smog equipment. The smog equipment would ask if there are any codes. The box would say “NO”, even if there were some. The smog machine would ask about the monitors. The box would said all ok, even though many have not run to completion. Anything else the smog equipment would request the box would retrieved from the vehicle and passed it through. Where there’s a will, there’s a way.
So these technicians clean piping vehicles will now just start clean scanning with some similar device. Don’t take my word for it; Google it! These devices are already available. This would be a lot harder to detect and pursue than the treadmill tester with the emission readings. I strongly believe the treadmill must continue to be part of the smog program to be effective. But who is going to listen to me?
It is all bullshit, plain and clear. The politicians and their save the world EPA bullshit is just that, bullshit. Another way to make them feel good and produce more taxes for them and more revenue for the auto industry.
They allow the airline industry, farming and industry in general to poison our food, air and water and they are worried about fumes from a fucking car. Why is cancer at an all time high even with all their bullshit regulations, wonder why?
It is all about government control, so welcome to the new communist republic of the united states.
Don’t be tooled. The smog check has nothing to do with saving the environment. If it did, the state would publish how much things have improved with environmental regulations over the last 30 years, but “oddly” no press agencies ever pick up this story, because they’re part of one big ideological lie designed to diminish working people by stealing their means, and giving it to people who do not contribute, e.g. if your vehicle needs to be “retired” and you actually pay taxes, you may receive $1,000 (for a vehicle worth much more than that), and if you live hand to mouth on the dole and have never pay any taxes, they give $1,500. Now if it were told that the environment is fine, who would employ all the environmentalist coming out of universities ready fine, fee, and fib their way to the top of the pork barrel.