undefined | Better HN

0 pointsnecovek4mo ago0 comments

I said it elsewhere in the thread, but the current model is already falling apart: it has led to random IoT devices becoming parts of widespread botnets, affecting Internet functioning, and putting unwitting consumers at risk.

Fixing that problem might turn out to be cheaper for competitors by making their platforms more open and avoiding the full responsibility as a vendor.

Basically, combine current and future legislation about electronic waste, cybersecurity of IoT and connected devices, and the carve-outs for free software and open source platforms, and suddenly it becomes much cheaper to ship a product that will run for 20 years (say a washing machine) if you as a vendor can guarantee some of this for the warranty period (1-5 years), and open up the platform to consumers and shift the responsibility at that point. Also imagine the case of a vendor going under which needs to be covered too (this would make subscriptions infeasible too).

If legislation demands this (imagine no insecure devices for 20 years), markets will do the rest.

0 comments

tavavex4mo ago

> I said it elsewhere in the thread, but the current model is already falling apart: it has led to random IoT devices becoming parts of widespread botnets, affecting Internet functioning, and putting unwitting consumers at risk.

But isn't this also exactly how the pitch will sound for what I proposed? You know, "The internet is too important and random people are allowed to upload and run random dangerous code within it with no oversight, this has to be stopped." The manufacturers will never bear the consequences of their choices, the consumers will. There might be a push to make the internet watertight by requiring all major websites and services to only allow access to "secure" devices and block all other traffic. After all, why spend money on cybersecurity when everyone can only use the (important parts of the) internet with their real names, and developers are de-anonymized?

Will this actually improve security? It seems very unlikely. But despite it, this move seems like exactly the kind of thing that's coming, because it massively benefits both companies and governments.

necovekOP4mo ago

You are right, which is why I stress the time component and e-waste concerns. If combined they end up meaning that a vendor ships you a device and they need to take it back for recycling in 2-7 years when they stop providing security updates, market will force a change.

At the moment, laws are disjoint even in EU, and not strict about what happens when you stop fixing security bugs.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse