6 ms·

I was expecting something much more sinister (that this man had a Fitbit and they used it to track his location). This is a much more positive use of the techno

I was expecting something much more sinister (that this man had a Fitbit and they used it to track his location). This is a much more positive use of the technology, but as a layman, my first concern is that this data can be easily forged.

Chilinot 8y ago
While I can certainly see its benefits in cases like this. It also worries me that falsely accusing someone of murder becomes ever so easier when courts start to trust these devices more and more in the future. For example, a murdurer wanting to stick the charges on some other person could steal that persons devices (phone, fitbit, etc). Wear them while commiting the murder. Then return them, without notice if done at night or something. The other person would then have a very hard time proving that he/she did not in fact commit to the murder, simply because courts have started to rely on these devices too much.
- newsbinator 8y ago
  If the courts rely on these devices, then these devices will log users. So if a second person puts on your device, and their physical numbers (heartrate, gait, perspiration, etc) differ from yours, you can get a notification, just like when you log into your email from an unknown location.
  - 14 8y ago
    I immediately thought about something like a jailbreak for the device where an attacker could attach a computer, run an exploit, and upload whatever data he predetermined. After the code was run it would leave no trace behind and hard to prove otherwise for the owner.
    - akuji1993 8y ago
      You might also be able to just alter the requests the fitbit sends to the servers to save the data from the device to show what you want (heart rate stopping at another time, differing heart rates, living for two more hours giving you time for an alibi).
- saagarjha 8y ago
  > For example, a murdurer wanting to stick the charges on some other person could steal that persons devices (phone, fitbit, etc). Wear them while commiting the murder. Then return them, without notice if done at night or something. A good theft-prevention measure, such as locking the device whenever it’s taken off, should prevent such a scenario.
  - wastedhours 8y ago
    People still use "password" as their password, and IoT devices are still left open to botnets. As silly as it might be with these security lapses, we can't have a legal structure that defaultly assumes a device's data is reliable for more than opening a line of questioning.
- aarong11 8y ago
  What's so different about this than taking a kitchen knife from somebody's home, committing a murder with it and then returning it?
  - Chilinot 8y ago
    It's that people will more generally trust the logs of the smart device to be correct, than whom the owner of the knife is. It's more about people putting more trust into smart devices than they should; and the fear this gives me for the future.

Chilinot 8y ago

While I can certainly see its benefits in cases like this. It also worries me that falsely accusing someone of murder becomes ever so easier when courts start to trust these devices more and more in the future. For example, a murdurer wanting to stick the charges on some other person could steal that persons devices (phone, fitbit, etc). Wear them while commiting the murder. Then return them, without notice if done at night or something. The other person would then have a very hard time proving that he/she did not in fact commit to the murder, simply because courts have started to rely on these devices too much.

newsbinator 8y ago
If the courts rely on these devices, then these devices will log users. So if a second person puts on your device, and their physical numbers (heartrate, gait, perspiration, etc) differ from yours, you can get a notification, just like when you log into your email from an unknown location.
- 14 8y ago
  I immediately thought about something like a jailbreak for the device where an attacker could attach a computer, run an exploit, and upload whatever data he predetermined. After the code was run it would leave no trace behind and hard to prove otherwise for the owner.
  - akuji1993 8y ago
    You might also be able to just alter the requests the fitbit sends to the servers to save the data from the device to show what you want (heart rate stopping at another time, differing heart rates, living for two more hours giving you time for an alibi).
saagarjha 8y ago
> For example, a murdurer wanting to stick the charges on some other person could steal that persons devices (phone, fitbit, etc). Wear them while commiting the murder. Then return them, without notice if done at night or something. A good theft-prevention measure, such as locking the device whenever it’s taken off, should prevent such a scenario.
- wastedhours 8y ago
  People still use "password" as their password, and IoT devices are still left open to botnets. As silly as it might be with these security lapses, we can't have a legal structure that defaultly assumes a device's data is reliable for more than opening a line of questioning.
aarong11 8y ago
What's so different about this than taking a kitchen knife from somebody's home, committing a murder with it and then returning it?
- Chilinot 8y ago
  It's that people will more generally trust the logs of the smart device to be correct, than whom the owner of the knife is. It's more about people putting more trust into smart devices than they should; and the fear this gives me for the future.