SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A Federal Trade Commission attempt to rein in a poorly secured IoT device is raising questions over whether the U.S. regulator has the power to crack down on vendors suspected of shoddy practices.
On Thursday, the FTC filed a complaint against Taiwanese manufacturer D-Link Systems that charged the company's internet routers and web cameras can easily be hacked, putting consumers at risk.
But the FTC's complaint doesn't cite evidence that the products have been breached, only the potential for harm to consumers.
That's among the reasons D-Link is contesting the complaint. "Notably, the complaint does not allege any breach of a D-Link Systems device," it said in a statement.
"Instead, the FTC speculates that consumers were placed 'at risk' to be hacked, but fails to allege, as it must, that actual consumers suffered," the company said.
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 5, Interesting) by MrGuy on Monday January 09 2017, @05:14PM
If the plane you are in crashes, then you should have done more research on the airline and their maintenance practices. FUCK YOU; wrong choice.
If you did do your homework, and it turns out the airline was lying about its maintenance practices to cover up their shoddy work, then you should have demanded independent certification of all their records before relying on them. FUCK YOU; wrong choice
If the independent certification authority was in cahoots with the airline to deceive customers, you should have demanded a second independent certification of the process. FUCK YOU; wrong choice
At some point, in my view, there's some responsibility of a provider of a product or service to provide something that's of a reasonable fitness for use, as opposed to putting the burden of discovering fitness for use exclusively on the consumer.
Whether an IoT device being reasonably robust against being rooted and used in a botnet (or for surveillance of the owner) falls within that definition of "reasonable fitness" is, to me, a reasonable question to ask.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 09 2017, @08:42PM
If that airline declares bankruptcy after the crash and fails to pay your family for killing you, you should have demanded a surety bond for your flight. FUCK YOU; wrong choice.
Yeah, I know, its a little off-topic. I'm just not happy about IoT companies seeding homes with millions of vulnerable doodads and then going out of business but leaving all their customers vulnerable without any way to get a security update or a refund. Too many of these companies are fly-by-night operations. (pun intended).