Samsung Wallet now unlocks some GM cars
Samsung Galaxy users in the US and Canada can use Samsung Wallet to lock, unlock and start selected GM vehicles with a digital key. The feature lets drivers approach and enter without taking out their phone, and GM says keys can be shared or disabled if a device is stolen.
Support begins with selected Cadillac electric vehicles, including the 2025–2027 Lyriq, 2026–2027 Optiq and 2027 Vistiq; GM plans to add more models by the end of 2026. Compatible phones must have ultra-wideband and Bluetooth Low Energy, and GM says customers will be notified through their vehicle’s mobile app. Digital keys are also planned for Apple and Google Wallet, though availability on those platforms is unclear.
- Samsung Wallet can operate selected GM vehicles.
- Initial support covers several Cadillac EVs.
- More GM models are due by the end of 2026.
New here? Start with this
Digital keys allow drivers to unlock and start vehicles using their smartphone instead of a physical key or fob. The technology uses wireless communication to connect the phone to the car's security system.
Car manufacturers such as General Motors have begun partnering with technology companies to develop digital key systems. Apple, Google and Samsung have all created platforms for digital keys that can be integrated into vehicles.
For drivers, digital keys have different capabilities compared to traditional keys, such as the ability to share access temporarily, disable a key remotely if a phone is lost, or instantly revoke access to a vehicle. This technology is part of a wider trend towards integrating vehicles more closely with smartphones and digital systems.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
This represents a rational evolution in vehicle security and convenience. Digital keys offer genuine advantages—they can be instantly disabled if lost or stolen, shared with family remotely, and provide stronger audit trails than physical keys. Modern cryptographic protocols are robust against realistic attack vectors, and the requirement for both Bluetooth and ultra-wideband makes unauthorised access considerably more difficult than forcing a traditional lock.
The case against
Whilst convenient, this technology introduces significant vulnerabilities that merit serious consideration. Wireless protocols remain susceptible to exploitation, software bugs could strand owners outside their own vehicles, and the dependence on phone batteries creates critical failure points. Privacy concerns around constant connectivity and location tracking are also legitimate, as is the broader question of whether consumers should be pressured toward technological solutions to problems that mechanical systems solve adequately and reliably.