SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the he-should-demonstrate-by-personal-example dept.
Ars Technica has a good write up on James Clapper's (the Director of National Intelligence) public comments about the Internet of Things (IoT), and how they may be used.
Considering that many IoT devices are intended for in-the-home devices, will citizens push back against this type of deeply intrusive monitoring?
Will people reject convenience that has the feature to be monitored in real time across many toys, products, and "smart" devices? How long will the data be retained, and can any of the collection be turned off?
What if it becomes a social construct in that tampering with an IoT device because it may contain or transmit something embarassing becomes tantamount to concealing evidence? Or if can cause an obstruction of justice if you disable the reporting functionality by blocking DNS or any other means of keeping the traffic inside the home?
What will the public let the government do with IoT data to foster better protection of civilian freedom from terror and tyranny?
[Update: James Clapper is the Director of National Intelligence (not the US FBI chief). -Ed.]
(Score: 3, Informative) by Marand on Friday February 12 2016, @12:42AM
I've actually been wondering about this. Can IoT devices be trusted to *not* seek out any open WiFi connection and connect from there?
They can if you wrap your house in tin foil :)
Jokes aside, there are paints that are made to do the same thing. Could serve dual purpose, keeping outsiders from accessing your wifi and keep your devices from accessing other wifi. Might be worth it just to block interference from other APs in your home...