avatar

Member #456763

Member Since: July 24, 2013

Country: United States

  • How about throwing in the appropriate headers in with the (un-header-ed) product?

    If you want 'em, just solder 'em on! As Jim #465537 says, "anyone playing this game needs to learn to solder." Not having to stock two versions has got to save enough money to provide the headers for anyone who wants to add them. (Apparently cost is not a big issue since the Photon was the same price with/without headers.)

  • I just saw this: TVs Now 'Smart' Enough To Get Hijacked, Pick Up Malware. Carelessly extending the capabilities of an IoT device also extends its vulnerabilities, as shown here!

  • LOL-ing about "So what? Some hackers in Russia are gonna turn my lights on?”

    In this recent story... CIA Eyes Russian Hackers in ‘Blackout’ Attack ...it appears Russian hackers disrupted the Ukraine power grid, almost certainly via the Internet and using some vulnerable interface (some "thing") as a gateway. Hyperbole to reality in one step.

    As noted, we'll have better tools to implement better security in 2016. But it won't help unless we change attitudes. .. for too long a project has ended with "Yay! It Works!" neglecting what might go wrong, intentionally or unintentionally.

    Lots of computer hacks are the result of "social engineering," stepping around the security protocols altogether. Similarly, lots of IoT hacks have been the result of unexpected actions, basically stepping around intended security protocols in unexpected ways. Stopping that has to start at the hardware design level and go up. Good network/interface hardware is just one brick in the wall.