SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the all-your-boink-detecting-mattresses-are-belong-to-us dept.
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found an interesting story over at The Register about regulating the security of IoT devices:
Washington DC think tank the Institute for Critical Infrastructure Technology is calling for regulation on "negligence" in the design of internet-of-things (IoT) devices.
Researchers James Scott and Drew Spaniel point out in their report Rise of the Machines: The Dyn Attack Was Just a Practice Run [PDF] that IoT represents a threat that is only beginning to be understood.
The pair say the risk that regulation could stifle market-making IoT innovation (like the WiFi cheater-detection mattress) is outweighed by the need to stop feeding Shodan.
"National IoT regulation and economic incentives that mandate security-by-design are worthwhile as best practices, but regulation development faces the challenge of ... security-by-design without stifling innovation, and remaining actionable, implementable and binding," Scott and Spaniel say.
[...] State level regulation would be "disastrous" to markets and consumers alike.
Does the ability of a company to make money now outweigh the security of our digital homes and devices?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 12 2016, @07:55PM
That only works on release. Long term it fails.
Company will move onto next product and abandon it. Leaving it in 'software maintenance only' which is code for 'we do not fuck with it ever again'.
Or company goes out of business. Your IoT device is now a brick but you left it plugged in because you forgot about it.
Basically you have one part of the puzzle. But where IoT is really failing in security is long term.