3 ms·
The remote control bit worries me. Anything that can be wirelessly controlled can have a weakness that can be exploited at worst or monitored at best. It's not
by ejr 12y ago
The remote control bit worries me. Anything that can be wirelessly controlled can have a weakness that can be exploited at worst or monitored at best. It's not infeasible to have detectors to monitor emanations yielding a whole new swath of privacy issues. No one else needs to know what type of medication you're on.
- cLeEOGPw 12y agoThat's what got me too. No matter what kind of encryption used, if someone records a person turning it off once, it can use that signal to turn off anytime he wants possibly sabotaging the whole thing. But it's not a problem with this product, it's just a general cryptography problem. Even military drones have it.
- jonathanyc 12y agoThat's a drastic assumption to make. Replay attacks[1] are a well known problem, and countermeasures can be implemented relatively simply. To say that they would work "no matter what kind of encryption is used" is completely false FUD. I'd worry more about general incompetence. [1]: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replay_attack http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replay_attack