“If there’s a vulnerability in one car, it could mean there’s a vulnerability in every car.”
Conversely, Mr. Wall pointed out that de facto software standards mean
that more programmers are focused on making those systems as secure as possible, versus having only a few coders working on a single, narrowly used program.
“A side benefit of controlling the entire thing,” said Mr. Grover at Hyundai, “is that we know everything that’s going on.”
A lack of standards and a diversity of self-driving systems does present one other obvious challenge: Variety is not
a virtue when cars must interact predictably with human drivers — and other robotic vehicles — to guarantee safety.
Douglas L. Davis of Intel, recently charged with spearheading
that company’s new self-driving car platform, Go, said, “Given the amount of computing power necessary for autonomous driving, we think it can benefit from greater commonality and predictable interfaces.”
“Mobileye already has the computer vision, for example,” he said.
“And we don’t want to go down one path that hinders us in the future from introducing new innovations.”
Bosch, which supplies safety and technology systems to automakers, including its own self-parking technology, acknowledges
that a single, one-size-fits-all system would be easier to work with.
“There is certainly no doubt that many carmakers have expressed the idea
that a more standardized platform would be attractive,” said John Wall, a senior vice president at QNX, which develops software that is used in millions of vehicles today.
A common automotive platform could also make it easier to develop new software and safety systems for self-driving cars.