3 ms·
The other day, speaking of the crisis in the engineering of cars, I wrote here something along the lines of "would you own an internet connected door, vehicle,
by mdp2021 4y ago
The other day, speaking of the crisis in the engineering of cars, I wrote here something along the lines of "would you own an internet connected door, vehicle, pacemaker"? Just as a stub of all the critical systems that you would never compromise in their security.
I forgot, there, to express a shout (for those who need implications spelt out):
Where do you want your ransom/ware today?
"Ransomware" or just "ransom": for example, attacks on internet connected thermostats do not need the ways of ransomware: the malicious part just asks if the victim prefers freezing temperature setting, scorching temperature and bills, or payment.
- zamnos 4y agoAh I mean if you want to take IoT (the S stands for security) nihilism to the extreme, then yeah, but it's not that hard as an network engineer to firewall off IoT devices so they can't become part of botnet. So yes, give me a door, a car, and a pacemaker. But no thanks on the ransomware. I can disable uPnP and only connect via VPN, with local only storage, no vendor cloud access. It's not great that all that needs to be done, and I'm not sure where it leaves those less knowledgeable about such things. But cynical unihilism that you're gonna get ransomewared is unconstructive and blocks any sort of progress. Everyday users want IoT devices, and unless we become Luddites over this (which is a valid option *), there's a duty to improve things while delivering what people ask for. Otherwise they're going to wander over to Home Depot and buy the cheapest and latest part of a botnet IoT camera. * https://twitter.com/soniacuff/status/1480864440136265733 https://twitter.com/soniacuff/status/1480864440136265733
- mdp2021 4y agoSorry for the delay. I think you are confusing "how things could go", and "how things would probably go" - ideal vs assessment of real. The constructive side you are missing is that of the warning about awareness, and the insistence of the commonsensical principle "you do not open complexities, with their inherent drawbacks (possibly critical), without proportional reasons".