Not sure if this is happening elsewhere, but on the local news last night they had a segment of a company called Intoxalock that had a Cyberattack. Intoxalock sells in car Breathalyzers that are usually court mandated after someone has a DUI. This attack is preventing anyone this one of these devices installed to start their vehicle.
Probably some ■■■■■■ off software engineer who doesn’t like drunks driving on our streets or was personally affected by a DUI driver. - IT WASN’T ME.
do you feel someone convicted of a DUI should forever be prevented from driving legally?
No. As I said (jokingly) - I wasn’t the one who did it.
Thank you for the reply
As a mechanic, I hated Breathalyzers on customers vehicles, and when I last delt with them, (2018ish IIRC) all that is/was required to start a vehicle was someone that hadn’t been drinking, generally they had extra month piece covers for others to start them, now having to do basic maintenance to diag work you need to start the vehicle multiple times, so shops can call in and either get a over ride code for x amount of time or “learn” how to bypass them depending, so if you figured that out you could just bypass it, not sure how long before the company realized it though, but still, just pay the neighborhood kid to blow in it before starting the vehicle…
They may have more advanced Breathalyzers now a days though…
Note: I am against drinking and driving…
NH has one of the laxest DUI laws in the country. There are people on the road today with a valid drivers license who have had 4 or higher DUIs. Top that off with we’re also one of the few states that doesn’t require auto insurance. For other states with lax DUI laws at least the elevated auto insurance has prevented some from drinking and driving. And many of these people are judgement proof because they have ZERO assets to sue for. They drive around in their cheap car with no insurance ■■■■■ and hit another car - OH WELL. Good luck.