News
Tesla to roll out “Sentry Mode” security system on Model S, X and 3 equipped with Autopilot 2+ hardware
With the recent increase in Tesla vehicle break-ins and vandalism popping up across social media and online forums, CEO Elon Musk’s recent hint at an upcoming “Sentry Mode” feature for Model S, Model X, and Model 3 vehicles that are equipped with Enhance Autopilot hardware is both welcome and timely. The reveal comes via Twitter and in response to a customer’s complaint about a large dent found on his Model 3. “Tesla Sentry Mode coming soon for all cars with Enhanced Autopilot.” said Musk. The newest feature bodes well for the electric carmaker who’s been rolling out security improvements over the last few months, including an in-car dash cam system and motion-sensing Enhanced Anti-Theft system.
Tesla Sentry Mode coming soon for all cars with Enhanced Autopilot https://t.co/x2buQWiABX
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 22, 2019
Broken windows and trunk thefts from Teslas in the California Bay Area were reported over the last few months in San Francisco and neighboring cities, to the extent that owners felt they were being targeted. The pattern of behavior seemed to indicate thieves were exploiting a weak point in Model 3 vehicles in particular – there isn’t a sensor to detect if a window has been broken. After gaining entry through the back quarter window, the rear seat would be lowered to survey the trunk, and if contents were found, the full back passenger window would be broken and used to gain entry. Eventually, some owners posted ideas online to drive a group effort at mitigation, and two owners even designed a locking device to secure the rear seats and deter would-be offenders.
Enhanced Autopilot (EAP), Tesla’s driver-assist software enabled in February 2017 with the version 8.0 software update, utilizes 8 surround cameras and 12 ultrasonic sensors and radar. Also part of its capabilities is a “Side Collision Warning” feature that, when considered together with the survey hardware, can easily be imagined as the core of an advanced mode for vehicle security. Instead of the built-in software functioning to warn a driver inside the vehicle of objects within certain proximity on the road, an “always on” type system could transmit warning signals to the owner’s app and/or have a built in response.
Although details provided on the coming “Sentry Mode” barely exist, Tesla’s commitment to the security of its vehicles has been clear. In the Version 9.0 software released last year, a built-in dash cam feature was included which utilized vehicles’ 360-degree array of Autopilot cameras to record and save footage to a driver-provided external USB drive. Although the feature could have several uses, hobby or otherwise, it was specifically added to aid with owner security issues such as capturing hit-and-run events. Another possible vision of “Sentry Mode” may merely expand on this functionality to incorporate more advanced recording options, including an “always on” option.
Tesla-targeting security issues were also reported in Europe last year and, combined with the US-based reports, the need for enhanced security features has continued to be addressed by the electric vehicle maker through gradual improvements and options. In November, an Enhanced Anti-Theft device was released via the Tesla online store which monitors movement inside Model S and Model X cabins when the vehicles are locked. The feature had already been part of an optional security package in European models. In August, “PIN to drive” was released in an over-the-air software update requiring a PIN-entry prior to vehicle operation. The feature was a result of Tesla’s continuous participation in “bug bounty” programs offering cash and a free Tesla Model 3 for vulnerabilities discovered in the company’s suite of vehicles and energy products.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
