[Megahurtz]

Originally Posted by m6-lt1

There is a lawsuit. I keep getting an ad for one on Instagram. Haven’t decided whether or not I’ll join. Just a heads up but your insurance was probably going to go up regardless. Everyone’s has in the last year regardless of whether or not their car can spy on them. Insurance companies like all other companies in the last year have figured out they can just charge more for their services.

Oh it went up already, then it went up again due to "third party data by LexisNExis". It literally told me why.

[m6-lt1]

Originally Posted by Megahurtz

Oh it went up already, then it went up again due to "third party data by LexisNExis". It literally told me why.

Gotcha. At least they were honest with you haha. I have since opted out of Lexis nexus sharing my info. I checked verisk’s website and according to the website they no longer send GM data to insurance. Whether or not we can believe that is another story.

It’s unfortunately not possible for owners of newer Camaro’s to pull the onstar module out and 100% retain all functionality (we lose the Bluetooth mic). I’m just going to pull the fuse when I do my first track day assuming the pdr has a separate mic which I believe it does.

[dun]

Can anyone verify how and if they successfully got their telematics deleted? I sent my dispute in a month ago and am still being tossed in circles by "waiting to hear back from the source" as if that has any relevance on deleting MY data...

[cellsafemode]

Originally Posted by m6-lt1

Gotcha. At least they were honest with you haha. I have since opted out of Lexis nexus sharing my info. I checked verisk’s website and according to the website they no longer send GM data to insurance. Whether or not we can believe that is another story.

It’s unfortunately not possible for owners of newer Camaro’s to pull the onstar module out and 100% retain all functionality (we lose the Bluetooth mic). I’m just going to pull the fuse when I do my first track day assuming the pdr has a separate mic which I believe it does.

you don't pull the whole module. that has the same effect as pulling the fuse and yes, that would impact Bluetooth mic.

you open the onstar module and pull out the radio daughter board. this board plugs into the external antennas and removing that only impacts the module's ability to reach out. you could also opt for plugging in terminating connectors in place of the antenna wires if you have them.

then you plug the module back in and connect the battery back up. everything should be happy except onstar will not be able to connect to anything.

you can then unplug any indicator lights to onstar.

I'm not aware of anyone verifying if newer camaro's have no daughter boards or behave any different than first year gen6's. the bt thing was always a thing.

[olrocker]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

you don't pull the whole module. that has the same effect as pulling the fuse and yes, that would impact Bluetooth mic.

you open the onstar module and pull out the radio daughter board. this board plugs into the external antennas and removing that only impacts the module's ability to reach out. you could also opt for plugging in terminating connectors in place of the antenna wires if you have them.

then you plug the module back in and connect the battery back up. everything should be happy except onstar will not be able to connect to anything.

you can then unplug any indicator lights to onstar.

I'm not aware of anyone verifying if newer camaro's have no daughter boards or behave any different than first year gen6's. the bt thing was always a thing.

Yes we need clarification because I’ve read that if this is done right like you said you do NOT loose the Bluetooth hands free microphone.

[m6-lt1]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

you don't pull the whole module. that has the same effect as pulling the fuse and yes, that would impact Bluetooth mic.

you open the onstar module and pull out the radio daughter board. this board plugs into the external antennas and removing that only impacts the module's ability to reach out. you could also opt for plugging in terminating connectors in place of the antenna wires if you have them.

then you plug the module back in and connect the battery back up. everything should be happy except onstar will not be able to connect to anything.

you can then unplug any indicator lights to onstar.

I'm not aware of anyone verifying if newer camaro's have no daughter boards or behave any different than first year gen6's. the bt thing was always a thing.

I asked someone on this board who did what you described and he was having Bluetooth mic issues. Someone else tried doing something with ohm resistors (sorry I don’t know squat about electricity so I might not be describing it right) in order to keep the Bluetooth mic.

[featurecar50]

Can you just unplug the wire connector from the module and leave the module in place?

[90503]

FYI...Some good news, perhaps....

Caught secretly selling car owners’ driving data, General Motors slapped with a hefty ban by Lina Khan’s FTC
Story by Christiaan Hetzner • 22h • 3 min read
In this article

General Motors reached a settlement with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission that will prohibit it from selling information on its customers’ driving habits without their knowledge and explicit consent for the next 20 years.

Until last year, consumers buying a GM vehicle were encouraged to sign up for its Smart Driver program that would collect data on aspects like chosen traffic routes and trip duration.

Yet it also extracted information on the rate of acceleration, what speeds they might attempt a corner at, and how hard the brakes would be slammed. It even relayed information on whether they were taking their car on a late-night spin. That’s because this information was of particular value for insurers keen on better assessing the risk posed by their policyholders.

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission's Lina Khan has slapped General Motors with a five-year ban prohibiting the carmaker from disclosing any personal data to consumer reporting agencies even if it receives customer consent.

What many of these GM customers did not know, however, is the carmaker had been cashing in on the sale of their personal data to third parties, irrespective of whether it would be to the detriment of the carmaker's unwitting customers, who believed it was for internal purposes only.

The feature has since been discontinued after the New York Times last March first uncovered the practice. The case highlights the risks to data privacy stemming from the lack of U.S. legislation equivalent to the GDPR law in Europe.

“With this action, the FTC is safeguarding Americans’ privacy and protecting people from unchecked surveillance,” outgoing FTC chair Lina Khan said in a statement on Thursday.

In her final days before her Republican colleague Andrew Ferguson replaces her as chair, Khan has been busy, recently issuing a report targeting pharmacy benefit managers over price gouging.

GM handed total ban for five years—even in cases of explicit consent

GM pledged to obtain affirmative consent by its owners to collect, use, or disclose certain types of connected vehicle data for the next two decades.

But for the first five years, the carmaker was slapped with a total ban—even if God came down personally to give explicit consent, GM would not be allowed to pass on the Almighty's data to a consumer reporting agency.

Moving forward, GM agreed furthermore to create a way for all U.S. consumers to request a copy of their data and, importantly, give them the means by which they could delete that information permanently.

“Respecting our customers’ privacy and earning their trust is deeply important to us,” GM said in a statement on Thursday. "We’re more committed than ever to making our policies and controls clear and accessible."

GM declined to comment further on the settlement deal. The FTC can issue such orders once it has sufficient reason to believe the law has been violated. Each violation can potentially result in a penalty of up to $51,744 under the civil law statute book.

GM would harvest driver data for sale in some cases every three seconds
Smart Driver was billed as a feature to promote safer driving, according to GM. The technology was used, however, to sell to third parties data related to consumer’s precise geolocation data and their driving behavior without their explicit consent—sometimes as often as every three seconds.

Not only did its customers not share in the revenue from their loss of privacy, the FTC reported, but this practice led to unexpected increases in their insurance premiums for Smart Driver participants, as well as in some case the total loss of coverage. The reverse, however, is also true, as it could in theory help lower payments.

Last year, the feature was discontinued across all vehicles sold by GM group brands, with the company ending its business arrangement with Verisk Analytics and LexisNexis Risk Solutions.

How damaging news of this settlement actually is for GM’s reputation is a matter up for debate.

In Europe, a market GM has largely exited, consumer advocates like Austria’s Max Schrems have gone to court in an effort to prevent the exploitation of their data from the likes of Meta, Google, and Apple—successfully in two landmark cases.

By comparison, Americans have a reputation for being more relaxed about their data, since many see leaving their digital fingerprints everywhere as an opportunity to gain valuable services. The more a platform like Facebook knows a user, the more tailored an experience they get, complete with targeted ads for products and services users find relevant.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

[Dynamical]

Yep. I opted out of both those companies and GM. I never signed up for any smart driver crap or any of that. I saw the data they supposedly share but there isn't much. I had them scrub everything (so they say). The report showed they had no driver data to show insurance. Whatever. I pulled my onstar fuse a few months ago just to "HELP" limit the violation of personal privacy. Yes, I know. I have a phone but I like to limit the things I can help. I have all location services turned off and all the settings gone through. Can't stop it 100% because they are allowed to be intrusive assholes.
Besides that, can't wait for spring for a HELL ride! Winter sucks!

[MT-SS1LE]

Where are all the Onstar apologists now? You know, the ones who ridiculed those of us who for years have been warning of the privacy dangers with onstar. Saying noble and honorable
GM would NEVER do anything nefarious with customer's private info. Don't have to much to say now huh?

[The Maverick]

Originally Posted by The Maverick

I've been getting the "we can't ID you" runaround as well. Let us know how things go with FTC!

Originally Posted by Mark R

Very interesting. I got the letter today and downloaded the 120 page pdf. This file was a complete dumpster fire, and I'm quite happy about that. It had me associated with about 100 addresses over the years. Most of the file concerned the 75 properties I have managed and sold as the trustee of a deceased client's trust, who died 7 years ago.

It listed all my insurance claims, credit history, address, etc., but also my ex-wife's email addresses, my parent's old address where I never lived, and a lot of the information was simply wrong.

There was no driving history of any kind, as was the case with the Verisk data I received two weeks ago. I never turned on my OnStar, nor got that Chevy Smart Driving app.

Overall, Lexis Nexis sucks to deal with, and they can take their jacked up report along with their smug attitude and deliberate slow walking of their legal duties of disclosure, and shove it up their own asses.

Hope this helps.

Bad news, good news?

The bad news is that we got a substantial car insurance increase this year, out of the blue, and the paperwork mentioned a CLUE report from LexisNexis that was considered.

It made me think I had gotten stung because Lexis-Nexis was not able to confirm my ID and I didn't follow through on my California opt out.

So I went back at Lexis-Nexis this month. Jumped through the hoops. Got the "we're not sure it's you" letter again (even though they apparently know me enough to report to the insurance company). Finally got my ID nailed down to their satisfaction by providing some ID docs via their website (which sure feels scammy), and the got the letter with the download linek and downloaded the documents today.

The good news is, the report contained no Chevy driving data (like the stuff that caused my hair to stand on end when I saw the tracking in the Chevy app before disabling that function). The report was just the same sort of stuff described above.

The CLUE report was just standard claims history, and obviously not the reason for the increase because we've had no changes there. Just the standard car insurance getting jacked up in California, I guess!

But at least it wasn't me enjoying "the world's best commute" in my sixth gen that got the rates jacked up...

[CHASLT1]

Rates just go up for no reason.

[olrocker]

I maintain OnStar and all on-board communications systems should be optional. Not the service, but the actual, physical hardware, transponders, and antennas. For those who want it, great, pay $2000 for the option to be installed in your car then another $50/month or whatever it is now.

If you don’t want it, you don’t even get an OnStar or emergency button. No hardwsre, no transponder, no antenna.

[bishopts]

I feel like they get more tracking info of your habits from your phone than your car. Killing off the antennas would definitely reduce the ability for the car to rat you out but everyone has a phone in their pocket doing the same thing anyway. My onstar module is still hooked up normal and i have bluetooth mic problems if I'm talking to anyone on an iphone. My ATS is the same way. I can talk to my android friends with no problems but my wife or kids can hardly hear me. Makes you wonder if it's the mic or the phones. But i did replace the mic and the A pillar trim on the driver side to attempt to fix it and it's still the same way.