Reading 07: Internet of Things
I am currently feeling pretty good about driving my old beat up Subaru which barely has a readable LED screen for radio. As I am approaching graduation and buying my first car, these concerns of hacking are honestly things I have not considered. I did not consider the holes in the security that these new and flashy features have created. It is obvious from the first Wired article on hacking a jeep that there are some things to be afraid of. If someone could control vehicles it would be not only easy to create disasters, the perpetrator would not even need to be close to the incident and could develop multiple attacks.
What really intrigues me is the response that the major car companies had to this development. In order to protect their business, they downplayed the lack of security. I believe that in order to be competitive in a market with shiny new wireless features, a car company must also be able to provide proper protection for these features. To ensure this I think that car companies should have to be audited for wireless security on all new features. Hackers should be invited and given incentive to hack into their cars to the best of their ability. I agree with David Progue that car hacking is difficult and nearly impossible, but if this is the case then why not prove it with intense security audits. It is the job of the manufacturer to ensure both physical safety and virtual/technological safety.
The Internet of Things investigation quickly moved from straight up lethal to just downright creepy. The baby monitor hacking is definitely designed to get an emotionally charged response since no one wants a rando looking at their cute innocent baby. But this one freaks me out more for potential black mail usage. Since so many people are opting to security systems and baby monitoring that work with their phones it is important that these video companies add additional security measures. I see not only safety threats, but also a huge market for blackmail. Video taping someone in the privacy of their own home could lead to scandalous or inappropriate tapes going viral. I think it is difficult with internet of things to determine if the benefits of the feature out weigh the potential risks.
At Grace Hopper I attended a lot of speeches on the Internet of Things. One of them was a panel discussing use of IoT for reducing world hunger and increasing monitoring of health and diseases. There were a lot of questions raised about the potential risks of having monitors on people and having their medical information susceptible to hacking. However, I feel that in a situation like this there is far more good to be done than there is harm. Some of the new commercial products seem to be in a features foot race and are abandoning security in order to have the best feature. In the case of cars and baby monitors, security is the top of my list of importance. I would much rather go featureless and feel safe. I think many other people share this sentiment which is why it should be the responsibility of the company to open up their product to hackers prior to release in order to ensure that there are not serious weaknesses.
What really intrigues me is the response that the major car companies had to this development. In order to protect their business, they downplayed the lack of security. I believe that in order to be competitive in a market with shiny new wireless features, a car company must also be able to provide proper protection for these features. To ensure this I think that car companies should have to be audited for wireless security on all new features. Hackers should be invited and given incentive to hack into their cars to the best of their ability. I agree with David Progue that car hacking is difficult and nearly impossible, but if this is the case then why not prove it with intense security audits. It is the job of the manufacturer to ensure both physical safety and virtual/technological safety.
The Internet of Things investigation quickly moved from straight up lethal to just downright creepy. The baby monitor hacking is definitely designed to get an emotionally charged response since no one wants a rando looking at their cute innocent baby. But this one freaks me out more for potential black mail usage. Since so many people are opting to security systems and baby monitoring that work with their phones it is important that these video companies add additional security measures. I see not only safety threats, but also a huge market for blackmail. Video taping someone in the privacy of their own home could lead to scandalous or inappropriate tapes going viral. I think it is difficult with internet of things to determine if the benefits of the feature out weigh the potential risks.
At Grace Hopper I attended a lot of speeches on the Internet of Things. One of them was a panel discussing use of IoT for reducing world hunger and increasing monitoring of health and diseases. There were a lot of questions raised about the potential risks of having monitors on people and having their medical information susceptible to hacking. However, I feel that in a situation like this there is far more good to be done than there is harm. Some of the new commercial products seem to be in a features foot race and are abandoning security in order to have the best feature. In the case of cars and baby monitors, security is the top of my list of importance. I would much rather go featureless and feel safe. I think many other people share this sentiment which is why it should be the responsibility of the company to open up their product to hackers prior to release in order to ensure that there are not serious weaknesses.
Comments
Post a Comment