3 ms·

Insurance can be a powerful force for creating standards. Most of the building codes in existence were created by the insurance industry. The NFPA (National Fir

by imgabe 10y ago

Insurance can be a powerful force for creating standards. Most of the building codes in existence were created by the insurance industry. The NFPA (National Fire Protection Association) was originally sponsored by a collaboration of insurance underwriters. [1] Insurers want to make sure that a building meets the code before offering insurance on it. If a building collapses or burns down and it is later shown that it was not built to code, the insurance policy will be void. I imagine similar incentives would hold for IoT security. The insurance would be contingent on the manufacturer following all available best practices to show that they did all they could to make the device secure. [1] http://www.nfpa.org/about-nfpa/nfpa-overview/history-of-nfpa http://www.nfpa.org/about-nfpa/nfpa-overview/history-of-nfpa

Zenst 10y ago
When I worked upon software for the oil industry for the building of oil rigs. The whole aspect of testing and insurance was very much key and Llyods of London have dedicated inspectors who would inspect and sign of parts as and when completed and without them, no insurance could be offered. So for large scale key area's you will find that insurance/reinsurance companies have more than actuaries giving values to a risk. It is in their interest after all, more so when large sums of money are equally at risk of theirs. AS for driving standards, yes, it happens. Though in some cases it happens after the horse has bolted. For example in the UK ALL insurance has a premium added to it to cover people who have high-risk properties subject to flooding and with many houses built upon flood planes in the 80's with low regard to risk of flooding than they should, then it is a sticky plaster solution that fixes a legacy issue that we all end up paying for. That is the concern with IoT and I do fear that a solution that see's everybody paying the premium to cover the issues of the past, will transpire either directly or indirectly.

by imgabe 10y ago

Zenst 10y ago

When I worked upon software for the oil industry for the building of oil rigs. The whole aspect of testing and insurance was very much key and Llyods of London have dedicated inspectors who would inspect and sign of parts as and when completed and without them, no insurance could be offered. So for large scale key area's you will find that insurance/reinsurance companies have more than actuaries giving values to a risk. It is in their interest after all, more so when large sums of money are equally at risk of theirs. AS for driving standards, yes, it happens. Though in some cases it happens after the horse has bolted. For example in the UK ALL insurance has a premium added to it to cover people who have high-risk properties subject to flooding and with many houses built upon flood planes in the 80's with low regard to risk of flooding than they should, then it is a sticky plaster solution that fixes a legacy issue that we all end up paying for. That is the concern with IoT and I do fear that a solution that see's everybody paying the premium to cover the issues of the past, will transpire either directly or indirectly.