EU citizen here, but FCC regulations also apply to me indirectly :) Not sure if I am allowed to comment there. I echo the many voices here that do not connect

EU citizen here, but FCC regulations also apply to me indirectly :) Not sure if I am allowed to comment there. I echo the many voices here that do not connect their devices to the Internet. Of course, I am in the minority that attaches a great deal of importance to these questions, so my devices either run free software (Tasmota and Esphome are two main ones), or have no Internet access (currently with ZigBee, though I have also used Vlans and separate Wi-Fi access points). The only service accessible from the outside (not firewalled) is HomeAssistant. I can see manufacturers doing the same, with a direct line to their servers for controlling smart devices, but that's only as good as the manufacturer's cyber security practices, what if they are hacked? Reducing internet exposure to "gateways" (HomeAssistant) in my case distributes a bit the problem, but also reduces the number of devices that have to be maintained up-to-date, so this may be an interesting avenue, especially if manufacturers are pushed to include a dedicated "IoT VLAN" and SSID in every (Wi-Fi) router that makes it easy for every consumer to adopt a separate network. To summarize, here are the main elements that could help, in my opinion: * Ensure that every IoT device (often sensors and actuators) has basic functionality available even when completely offline (including during initial setup). * Ideally these bits of interaction should take place over a standardized interface (the Matter standard seems to fit this perfectly). * Maybe consider strongly incentivizing gateways instead of directly connecting IoT devices to the Internet, and hold these to higher security standards?