4 ms·

As Dan Geer warned[1], embedded devices must not be both unfixable and immortal. Either they have some sort of remove management interface and receive regular s

• pavel_lishin 10y ago
  > or they must have a limited lifespan This seems like it would give free range to sell shitty devices that are obsolete the moment they come out of packaging - or worse, that brick themselves on a timer for supposed security purposes (think HP ink cartridges.)
  • pdkl95 10y ago
    I agree, but the unfixable+immortal combination isn't really an acceptable situation. The solution for most devices is to simply keep them off the internet. Being a host on the internet requires some level of care and maintenance so you don't become a hazard to others. I doubt most light-bulbs or thermostats are worth the ongoing expenses of maintaining security updates into the indefinite future. In theory, traditional goods that last more than a few years should be more successful on the market than self-destructing devices with dubious internet features.
  • Already__Taken 10y ago
    This is fine, there is a market for that like anything else. The problem is where that is not a function the consumer is aware off at the time of purchase. Now perhaps some good recycling laws would combat abuses of such an effect.
• fucking_tragedy 10y ago
  Tying IoT devices to cloud services almost guarantees a limited lifespan.
  • snaily 10y ago
    While this is a case of "two wrongs make a right"[0] - anything that provides even some value without the backend up will still be connected, perennially at risk of getting taken over by a bad actor. [0] And a pretty strong argument against "forever" IoT devices.
    • foota 10y ago
      Maybe the solution is some sort of prepaid credit for a cloud computing network? like lambda or something. That would at least shift the burden of staying running.
  • the8472 10y ago
    That only means they might eventually stop fulfilling their primary function. But they might remain plugged in and serve as bot without anyone noticing for years.
    • fucking_tragedy 10y ago
      Very true. While I had assumed that most people would toss their gadgets once their functionality had been disabled, I wouldn't buy a new fridge or other appliance just because I can't load cat pics on it anymore.
      • TeMPOraL 10y ago
        Depends on the appliance. Your fridge will probably work when disconnected from the cloud. Your LED lightbulbs? I can imagine them getting bricked. I know of one laser cutter, featured some time ago on HN, that becomes a very big paperweight when disconnected from the Internet...
• amlib 10y ago
  Maybe we should leave the task of authentication, encryption and whatever phoning home these devices need to do to some kind of industry standard relaying protocol that lives on a router. You would then only need updating the router to keep any WAN activity safe for the IoT devices. Updates can also be delivered safely trough this mechanism, which lazy manufacturers would definitely still forget to do (but may be useful for keeping local network access safe , which would not rely on this mechanism). That is, if router manufacturers could also keep their crap safe... If you don't trust an off the shelf router for this, you could also use a computer setup as a router with such relaying software. It would be as simple as running a dhcp server or something. Routers could also default to denying any authentication from WAN, with the user changing this policy on a per device basis or just allow eveything.
• bsder 10y ago
  > As Dan Geer warned[1], embedded devices must not be both unfixable and immortal. So when do you want me to turn off your colored LED light bulbs you bought? Yeah, thought so.
  • pdkl95 10y ago
    > you bought? I assure you I have not (and never will) purchase any "internet enabled" (or "smart") device. Most devices worked just fine without a network interface. To turn off my (standard) LED light bulbs, use the switch on the wall.