4 ms·
Does the watch vulnerability meaningfully increase the risk here? These people would know what a child's routine is already, and would not need smartwatch info
by Eridrus 8y ago
Does the watch vulnerability meaningfully increase the risk here?
These people would know what a child's routine is already, and would not need smartwatch info.
And we're talking about people to are also technically savvy enough to reverse engineer this software.
It seems more likely that even in this situation, the watch would be a help rather than a harm.
I'm not saying we shouldn't care about security, but people tend to over-react whenever children are involved.
- yellowapple 8y agoAs frustrating as it can be sometimes, if children are involved, it's almost certainly a better idea to overreact than underreact.
- macintux 8y agoAgreed. I hate the "won't someone think of the children" attitude towards social norms, but they are for the most part utterly defenseless and deserving of some basic protection.
- alasdair_ 8y ago>Does the watch vulnerability meaningfully increase the risk here? Yes. You can turn on remote listening and spy on the wearer (and anyone else nearby).
- andrewaylett 8y agoThey're sold as a tool for enhancing the security of your children, but it's fairly trivial to subvert them to both not do the job they're sold for, as well as giving the attacker extra information they could otherwise have only got through proximity. If there's a real risk (and while it might be relatively rare, real risks do exist) then the regular routine is hopefully already set up to mitigate the risk. The value to the attacker is in being able to take advantage of deviations from routine that would apart from the watch be invisible to them.