Maybe. Or maybe they are simply responding to those news articles and to the EPA, and, realizing that public opinion is everything, doing whatever makes them look as though they are trying to Do The Right Thing, i.e., apologize and clean up the problem whatever it turns out to be. This is the only way for a company to retain the respect of their customer base. I think that even if it turns out to be something other than a deliberate act, this was still the right thing to do at this stage. They're acknowledging that the EPA discovered a problem, and that they will do whatever it takes to fix it. This doesn't mean the company currently believes the problem was deliberate fraud on their part. It might, it might not. But I don't see them hanging themselves quite yet.



Aha! Very cool! Yes, that makes sense! And yep, it was a telephone game: The BBC article that was linked earlier, treated it as though it was actually a separate device, even calling it a "sophisticated piece of kit".

I understand enough about engines and computers to make me dangerous, but the byzantine nature of government nomenclature and regulations is completely beyond me. Though I understand how the regulations were probably written before there was a such thing as modifying the software in your car's engine management computer.

The actual real technical details of this are going to be fascinating, when they come out. I'm super interested in that. I'm hoping for an extensive Ars Technica write up on it.