Why Oslo’s Bus Security Tests Highlight the Hidden Risks of Connected Vehicles

 

Modern transportation looks very different from what it used to be, and the question of who controls a vehicle on the road no longer has a simple answer. Decades ago, the person behind the wheel was unquestionably the one in charge. But as cars, buses, and trucks increasingly rely on constant connectivity, automated functions, and remote software management, the definition of a “driver” has become more complicated. With vehicles now vulnerable to remote interference, the risks tied to this connectivity are prompting transportation agencies to take a closer look at what’s happening under the hood. 

This concern is central to a recent initiative by Ruter, the public transport agency responsible for Oslo and the surrounding Akershus region. Ruter conducted a detailed assessment of two electric bus models—one from Dutch manufacturer VDL and another from Chinese automaker Yutong—to evaluate the cybersecurity implications of integrating modern, connected vehicles into public transit networks. The goal was straightforward but crucial: determine whether any external entity could access bus controls or manipulate onboard camera systems. 

The VDL buses showed no major concerns because they lacked the capability for remote software updates, effectively limiting the pathways through which an attacker could interfere. The Yutong buses, however, presented a more complex picture. While one identified vulnerability tied to third-party software has since been fixed, Ruter’s investigation revealed a more troubling possibility: the buses could potentially be halted or disabled by the manufacturer through remote commands. Ruter is now implementing measures to slow or filter incoming signals so they can differentiate between legitimate updates and suspicious activity, reducing the chance of an unnoticed hijack attempt. 

Ruter’s interest in cybersecurity aligns with broader global concerns. The Associated Press noted that similar tests are being carried out by various organizations because the threat landscape continues to expand. High-profile demonstrations over the past decade have shown that connected vehicles are susceptible to remote interference. One of the most well-known examples was when WIRED journalist Andy Greenberg rode in a Jeep that hackers remotely manipulated, controlling everything from the brakes to the steering. More recent research, including reports from LiveScience, highlights attacks that can trick vehicles’ perception systems into detecting phantom obstacles. 

Remote software updates play an important role in keeping vehicles functional and reducing the need for physical recalls, but they also create new avenues for misuse. As vehicles become more digital than mechanical, transit agencies and governments must treat cybersecurity as a critical aspect of transportation safety. Oslo’s findings reinforce the reality that modern mobility is no longer just about engines and wheels—it’s about defending the invisible networks that keep those vehicles running.