back to article You know IoT security is bad when libertarians call for strict regulation

We all know the vast majority of Internet-of-Things devices haven’t anything more than a fig leaf for protection. Now the unlikeliest of folks are calling for rules to improve IoT security: libertarians. In a session today at the RSA infosec conference in San Francisco, Olaf Kolkman, the Internet Society’s chief internet …

Anonymous Coward

Re: Internet ID to follow?

Because getting involved would be WORSE than sticking your head in the sand. Speak up and you stick out. And sticking out just gets you hammered.

0
0

Laws can't solve this

The government can pass a law that will magically stop hacking and will remove all unknown unknowns?

Let's face it, IoT will kill the internet. It was fun while it lasted, now it is time for the new generation to move on to the next thing.

1
0

"The government can pass a law that will magically stop hacking and will remove all unknown unknowns?"

No, but they can pass laws to make sure companies can't just shrug their shoulders and say "not my problem" when their kit gets hacked.

"Let's face it, IoT will kill the internet. It was fun while it lasted, now it is time for the new generation to move on to the next thing."

The Internet won't be killed, but neither will it be the Wild West any more; governments are going to police some aspects of it and corporations will pay for private security within their own networks.

On the whole, the Internet will get a bit more expensive to cover the cost of "good enough" security. People will pay for security when they get enough pain from the effects of not having it, then individuals will do what they can afford to do - rich people will pay for network security services and poor people will be at the mercy of criminals, same as the physical world.

2
0
Silver badge

Oh? What if companies move out of your jurisdiction? What if they never were in your jurisdiction because they're using gray markets?

0
0

"corporations will pay for private security within their own networks."

Like I said, the internet is dead, long live private networks. Today the internet only works because nearly everything connected to it is based on a small number of regulary updated OSs. IoT will kill this. I've spent 10 years trying to sell security to IoT companies. Most end customers will not spend a penny for security and don't give a s**t about security and privacy (if they did you would not be reading this on your Android phone). The automobile comparison is a false one. It involves protection against known knowns, it is economically viable for devices that cost 15000+€ not 15€ and a country can control nearly all devices connected to its road network (try stopping a rogue IoT device in another country connecting to your countries network)

0
0
Silver badge

Whatever happened to just blocking that country wholesale?

0
0
Silver badge

Libertarians is a fairly wide church. Most libertarians believe that the state should strongly support contract law for instance.

False advertising laws are another reasonable thing to many libertarians. Regulations against devices that are sold with severe defects ( eg: IoT security ) is a reasonable extension to this.

As somebody else pointed out above, if your IoT device is part of a botnet, that doesn't just affect you. It's similar to the difference between allowing people to own guns and allowing them to fire them blindly in public places.

5
0
Silver badge

Bah!

Whereas I am coming to the opinion that what is needed is a small team of government funded hackers to bork all consumer products that fail to secure their nettyness, along with shills to talk up those brands on teh intarwebs making a serious commitment to proper IoTat securage.

Reasoning: If someone buys a baby alarm and babycam that is insecure, they will most likely not know and not care when told. If the said device breaks down they will buy another. After the third breakdown they will buy a better brand and one-star the offender on Amazon. When they come to buying a better brand, there will be an undercurrent of opinion planted out there to guide their uneducated selection.

Yes it is sinister and has serious flaws. But we already lost DNS to the lightbulb and babycam army once. How about we get fucking serious about changing the cheap-and-careless culture before something extremely inconvenient is perpetrated.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Bah!

"Yes it is sinister and has serious flaws. But we already lost DNS to the lightbulb and babycam army once. How about we get fucking serious about changing the cheap-and-careless culture before something extremely inconvenient is perpetrated."

Because the ONLY way they'll learn is by something extremely inconvenient...if not deadly. The easiest way to shock a culture into changing is through a crisis.

0
0

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018