As vehicles evolve into complex, connected software platforms, the automotive industry is being forced to rethink everything from architecture and security to consumer trust and commercial models.

Software-defined vehicles (SDVs) promise flexibility, new revenue streams and continuous improvement, but they also introduce new risks, costs and psychological barriers for customers that OEMs must navigate carefully.

Claire Maslen, SVP of commercial & operations at Trustonic, explians why, although SDVs are making strong progress, they aren’t a finished reality yet, how whole-vehicle orchestration changes the security challenge and what OEMs need to get right to scale safely while maintaining consumer confidence.

---

Software-defined vehicles are often described as an emerging concept. Why are they already a commercial reality for OEMs today?

The idea of the software-defined vehicle is often presented as if it’s already arrived in its fully realised form, but that’s not really the case. We haven’t yet reached the point where vehicles operate as a single, unified, software-managed entity in the way many people think.

What is a commercial reality, though, is the transition that’s already underway, primarily being driven by over-the-air [OTA] software updates.

Most OEMs can now remotely update individual domains within the vehicle – such as infotainment, connectivity modules and certain control systems. This alone fundamentally changes the commercial relationship between manufacturers and vehicles. Instead of software being fixed at the point of sale, it’s becoming something that can evolve, be updated, patched or monetised over the vehicle’s lifetime.

Critically, it also allows OEMs to resolve software-only issues without physical recalls, avoiding the significant cost, logistics and brand impact traditionally associated with recall campaigns.

Where the industry is heading [and where it’s not yet fully arrived] is the point where the entire vehicle can be managed holistically through software. In a true SDV, systems share common architectures and APIs, allowing OEMs to manage the vehicle by policy rather than by individual component. In that world, a single software update could change the posture of the entire vehicle including its performance characteristics, safety behaviour, security settings and feature availability.

So, while we’re not yet at the end state of SDVs, they are already a commercial reality in the sense that OEMs are well on the path. OTA updates have moved from single-domain updates towards multi-domain coordination, and this is laying the groundwork for fully software-defined vehicles eventually.”

As more intelligence moves from the cloud into the vehicle itself, how does this fundamentally change the security challenge for manufacturers?

Moving intelligence from the cloud into the vehicle significantly expands the potential attack surface OEMs need to protect. Vehicles aren’t just endpoints anymore – they’re essentially ‘computers on wheels’, running complex software stacks, processing sensitive data and increasingly supporting monetised services.

As a result of this, security now has to look far beyond traditional concerns like key storage, encryption and OTA delivery. OEMs now need to think about a wide range of in-vehicle use cases, including secure payments, identity management, secure storage of system data / logs and user data, advanced intrusion detection and prevention systems [IDPS], secure logging and continuous monitoring.

One of the biggest shifts is the need for defence-in-depth architectures. Rather than relying on a single security mechanism, manufacturers must design layered systems that prevent attackers from cascading attacks across domains. If one system is compromised, it shouldn’t provide an entry to the rest of the vehicle.

Trusted execution environments [TEEs], hardware security modules [HSMs], Intrusion Detection Systems (IDPS), strong attestation between systems and the ability to deploy new trusted applications securely over time all become critical. Just as importantly, security needs to be embedded from the very start of vehicle design. It can’t just be bolted on later. Core security components need to be designed so they can be updated safely, while also being extremely difficult to remove or tamper with.

In short, as vehicles become more intelligent, security has to be built in from the start – it can’t just be added on as a feature.

You attended CES earlier this year. What did it reveal about how autonomous and adaptive in-vehicle systems are developing?

CES showed us just how integral sensing has become to the growth and evolution of autonomous and adaptive vehicles. There was a big focus at the event on not just external sensors such as radar, cameras and lidar, but also on what’s happening inside the vehicle.

Externally, vehicles are becoming more capable of building a 360-degree model of their surroundings in real time. This is fundamental to autonomy, but it’s only one part of the picture. Internally, more emphasis in being put on in-cabin sensing and monitoring, including driver behaviour, attention levels, cognitive load and even physiological indicators.

What’s really interesting is how these two sensing worlds overlap. As vehicles become more autonomous, there will be long transition periods where control passes back and forth between the vehicle and the driver. Managing those handover moments safely means having a deep understanding of not just the environment, but of whether the driver is in a fit state to take control of the vehicle.

CES showcased technologies far more advanced than traditional driver monitoring. New systems are now being introduced that can analyse factors such as eye movement, pupil dilation, heart rate, speech patterns and behaviour under stress. In the future, vehicles may even be able to detect medical emergencies, escalating issues to emergency services or adapting vehicle behaviour in real time.

These developments suggest we’re moving towards a future where vehicles are adaptive as well as autonomous, responding not only to their environment but also to the people inside them. This will change what consumers expect from their in-vehicle experience and critically will likely open up new revenue opportunities for OEMs that go far beyond those being discussed currently”

As vehicle systems become more autonomous and less visible to drivers, how can OEMs maintain consumer trust in how those systems behave?

Trust is going to be one of the biggest and most critical challenges as autonomy increases. As systems operate more independently and their decision-making becomes less visible, consumers need to have confidence that vehicles will operate safely and predictably.

From a technical point of view, this calls for a combination of secure boot, strong identity management, continuous attestation between systems and clear rules governing what each system is allowed to do. Digital identities help ensure systems understand their permissions and can’t operate outside their intended parameters, which prevents scenarios where compromised components attempt to take control of functions they should never be able to access.

Post-quantum cryptography for inter-processor communication, secure execution environments and strong system isolation all have a role to play. Together, they ensure that even if attackers attempt to manipulate vehicle behaviour, the system recognises that those actions fall outside its authorised operating envelope.

However, trust isn’t just a technical issue – it’s also psychological. The automotive industry is asking consumers to rethink a relationship that has existed for over a century, where the driver is always in control. That transition needs to be managed carefully, transparently, and gradually if OEMs want to maintain consumer confidence.”

Over-the-air updates are now central to the modern vehicle. What are the risks if OEMs cannot clearly demonstrate that software updates are secure and untampered with?

The risks are huge. If OTA updates aren’t clearly secure, critical vehicle systems could be compromised, disabled or even controlled remotely. In the worst-case scenario, this could result in serious accidents and widespread loss of trust.

As OTA advances from single-domain updates to whole-vehicle updates, the risk profile changes significantly. For example, simply updating an infotainment system is relatively low risk, but updating multiple interconnected systems, such as radar, braking, powertrain control and displays, needs careful coordination and validation.

OEMs need to ensure update mechanisms themselves can’t be abused. This means never sharing keys in clear text, authenticating and attesting connections before initiating downloads, encrypting payloads using strong cryptography, decompressing and validating updates within secure environments and ensuring only approved code is installed on authorised systems.

It’s important to understand that, when one component can update multiple subsystems, it becomes a high-value target for hackers. If that update mechanism is compromised, an attacker could potentially cascade an attack across the vehicle. This is why validation, permission control and monitoring during the update process are non-negotiable.”

From a commercial perspective, how damaging can security failures be to sales, adoption and long-term brand value?

Security failures are not only damaging to individual OEMs, but to the automotive industry as a whole. High-profile breaches impact consumers’ perception not only of the affected brand, but of connected and autonomous vehicles as a whole.

Traditionally, OEMs are trusted hardware manufacturers but, as they move towards software-defined vehicles, they’re effectively asking customers to extend that trust into software, data and digital services. If consumers don’t believe an OEM can deliver secure, high-quality software, they will be reluctant to pay premiums for connected services or new digital features.

This has a direct impact on revenue. Many OEMs are counting on software-driven services as key drivers of future profit, but adoption of paid connected services is still low. Security concerns and lack of trust are a major factor holding that adoption back.

This is why security can’t just be seen as a technical ‘checkbox’ – it’s something that can set OEMs apart, or, if ignored, can quickly damage trust and reputation.”

What role do Tier 1 suppliers play in helping OEMs maintain end-to-end security across increasingly complex software supply chains?

Vehicle security is essentially a supply chain challenge. It starts at the silicon level and extends upward through Tier 1 suppliers, system integrators and OEMs themselves.

Tier 1s play an important role because OEMs depend on them to deliver systems that meet increasingly demanding security requirements. This takes a shift in mindset. “Good enough” security is no longer acceptable when systems are deeply interconnected and remotely updatable.

As vehicles become more complex, multiple Tier 1 suppliers will also need to work together more closely. Security policies will need to be applied consistently across domains, even when different suppliers are responsible for different systems. That coordination is essential to maintaining a coherent security posture across the vehicle.”

Looking ahead, what will separate the OEMs that successfully scale software-defined vehicles from those that struggle to gain consumer confidence?

Ultimately, the difference will come down to trust, scale and sustainability. Developing and maintaining software-defined vehicles is expensive, and OEMs that fail to gain consumer confidence will struggle to build the revenue needed to fund ongoing R&D, creating a downward spiral.

This transition is likely to change the industry as we know it. Not every OEM will be able to build and maintain its own full SDV platform. We’re already seeing more collaboration, platform sharing and partnerships with Tier 1s and silicon vendors.

Some manufacturers will differentiate through hardware optimised for software performance, while others will rely on shared platforms and focus on tuning, design and brand experience. What will matter most is whether consumers trust OEMs to deliver vehicles that are secure, safe and genuinely beneficial – not just impressive from a technical point of view.

Moving to software-defined vehicles isn’t just about technology. It completely changes the way businesses operate, how teams think and even how customers experience products. The companies that understand and act on this are the ones that will ultimately succeed.

“The automotive challenge presented by connected software” was originally created and published by Just Auto, a GlobalData owned brand.

The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.