I have more trust on Amazon enhancing Ring devices than Google, who practically killed Nest innovation.

I'm still deeply skeptical of IoT home automation in general. In IoT the 'S'es stand for Security and Support.

SaltyNZ:

 

I'm still deeply skeptical of IoT home automation in general. In IoT the 'S'es stand for Security and Support.

 

What are you worried of happening?

I too have faith that Amazon could improve Ring.com

Will be interesting to see what happens in the coming year or two. 

I really rate my Ring Door Bell. 

They should buy Nest too. 

Things like Mirai, or hacked door locks, or bricking perfectly good equipment because you don't want to support it anymore? IoT by definition falls into the class of 'things I shouldn't have to worry about'. I don't have to worry about the deadlock on my door suddenly not working because Yale don't make them anymore. I don't have to worry about my dumb fridge ordering a thousand pizzas to be delivered because some 14 year old kid in Slovakia is bored. I don't have to worry about my heater telling the manufacturer when I'm home and them on-selling the data to random people I don't know.

All of those links are real things that actually happened, and they should not. Until such questions are answered my IoT installation is limited to light bulbs - which have their own issues - but only because I'm too lazy to get out of bed when the kids leave the toilet light on in the middle of the night. Unfortunately we are nowhere near getting those questions answered. US Congress may be moving things in the right direction but that will only apply to devices that the US government acquires. That will naturally tend to split the market into cheap stuff from Ali Express - i.e. same as today - and expensive stuff that meets the US government requirements. Care to wager the likely installed base of each category?

SaltyNZ:

 

Things like Mirai, or hacked door locks, or bricking perfectly good equipment because you don't want to support it anymore? IoT by definition falls into the class of 'things I shouldn't have to worry about'. I don't have to worry about the deadlock on my door suddenly not working because Yale don't make them anymore. I don't have to worry about my dumb fridge ordering a thousand pizzas to be delivered because some 14 year old kid in Slovakia is bored. I don't have to worry about my heater telling the manufacturer when I'm home and them on-selling the data to random people I don't know.

 

All of those links are real things that actually happened, and they should not. Until such questions are answered my IoT installation is limited to light bulbs - which have their own issues - but only because I'm too lazy to get out of bed when the kids leave the toilet light on in the middle of the night. Unfortunately we are nowhere near getting those questions answered. US Congress may be moving things in the right direction but that will only apply to devices that the US government acquires. That will naturally tend to split the market into cheap stuff from Ali Express - i.e. same as today - and expensive stuff that meets the US government requirements. Care to wager the likely installed base of each category?

 

The market should prevail in this instance. If people want higher quality longer supported and secure devices, then they should be prepared to pay for them. No such thing as a free lunch. If the market fails to deliver what consumers want, then those providers will be forced to create what the market will bear. 

I guess on the flip side the average joe doesn't know about the potential issues, but as the market matures (I'd still consider it in it's absoloute infancy despite the age of IOT) it will become more well known.

Early adopters always bear the brunt of these sort of issues. 

networkn:

 

I guess on the flip side the average joe doesn't know about the potential issues, but as the market matures (I'd still consider it in it's absoloute infancy despite the age of IOT) it will become more well known.

 

Yeah, I take your point, but internet connected computers have been a thing for nearly 20 years now and we still get slammed regularly with yet another bot net. Windows XP still had around 7% market share last year when Wannacry was doing the rounds.

The market will likely fail here as the costs are hidden to the average Joe. If Joe's $10 internet enabled camera is zombied into a million strong DDOS network, he probably won't even realise as long as he can still watch his cat from work. Society as a whole will bear a cost, but nobody is going to point out to Joe that his insurance is more expensive because people like him didn't patch their cameras. In all likelihood, the camera can't be patched because the vendor threw together a barely functional firmware image, ran 5000 to production, and then moved straight on to something else.

The only thing that will work is regulation. Regulation that forces vendors to support their products with patches for a certain period, because 'the market' will opt to externalise all those costs for IoT just as it does for every other industry. We didn't start cleaning up pollution until the governments stepped in; what makes you think we'll be any better at securing devices that come free with your breakfast cereal?

EDIT: Also, another factor is remote destruction like the one I linked to above. How do you know that the thing you buy today isn't going to be deactivated by the vendor next week? They're certainly not going to telegraph it. The hypothetical invisible hand of the market only works when people know what's going on, but that is something you can never know.

EDIT Part 2: I see there's a firmware update for my Hue bridge that's been waiting for me since the 5th of February. One of the things it has in the release notes is 'Various stability and performance improvements.' Do I need that? Is it important? It doesn't sound important; after all, it hasn't crapped out or failed to turn the lights on and off. I don't know whether it's important enough to risk possibly failing and leaving me with a $100 paperweight. How would I know? More to the point, how would Joe know?

@networkn: They should buy Nest too. 

 

Since Google bought Nest I doubt it will be up for sale any time soon.

@networkn:

 

The market should prevail in this instance. If people want higher quality longer supported and secure devices, then they should be prepared to pay for them. No such thing as a free lunch. If the market fails to deliver what consumers want, then those providers will be forced to create what the market will bear. 

 

The market won't do anything. People will still buy $2 LED lights from AliExpress if they can, instead of buying a $50 light from a known worldwide brand. Telling them the $50 is more secure will do nothing.

freitasm:

 

@networkn:

 

The market should prevail in this instance. If people want higher quality longer supported and secure devices, then they should be prepared to pay for them. No such thing as a free lunch. If the market fails to deliver what consumers want, then those providers will be forced to create what the market will bear. 

 

 

The market won't do anything. People will still buy $2 LED lights from AliExpress if they can, instead of buying a $50 light from a known worldwide brand. Telling them the $50 is more secure will do nothing.

 

Caveat Emptor. I pretty much assume anything I'd buy from AliExpress is going to be insecure, more unreliable, or in other ways inferior. I assume that based on price. 

freitasm:

 

@networkn: They should buy Nest too. 

 

 

Since Google bought Nest I doubt it will be up for sale any time soon.

 

Yeah, I knew that, but I can dream right? :)

networkn:

 

Caveat Emptor. I pretty much assume anything I'd buy from AliExpress is going to be insecure, more unreliable, or in other ways inferior. I assume that based on price. 

 

Yeah, you do. So do I. And there are dozens of us. There are billions of Joes. Joe doesn't know jack about computer security. All he knows is that he has a choice between a $10 camera and a $100 camera.

SaltyNZ:

 

networkn:

 

Caveat Emptor. I pretty much assume anything I'd buy from AliExpress is going to be insecure, more unreliable, or in other ways inferior. I assume that based on price. 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, you do. So do I. And there are dozens of us. There are billions of Joes. Joe doesn't know jack about computer security. All he knows is that he has a choice between a $10 camera and a $100 camera.

 

I am not sure what you are proposing? Regulation? Think expensive and unmanageable. More press on how people need to be more careful, and take into account potential risks, already happens, but not the scale required. 

People are becoming more aware of security, but most people are not only not interested, but lack the understanding of the technical nature of the product. 

networkn:

 

I am not sure what you are proposing? Regulation?

 

Yes, that's exactly what I'm proposing. Because 'the market' externalises every cost that regulations allow them to. And that will make things more expensive, because those costs are now included.

Bad security is digital pollution. Your car would be a lot cheaper if it didn't have to conform to any emissions standards, and your petrol would be a lot cheaper if we didn't include taxes to pay for roads. Of course, you wouldn't have any roads to drive on, and you'd choke on the fumes if you did, but at least you'd die happy knowing there weren't any pesky regulations costing you money.

SaltyNZ:

 

networkn:

 

I am not sure what you are proposing? Regulation?

 

 

 

 

Yes, that's exactly what I'm proposing. Because 'the market' externalises every cost that regulations allow them to. And that will make things more expensive, because those costs are now included.

 

Bad security is digital pollution. Your car would be a lot cheaper if it didn't have to conform to any emissions standards, and your petrol would be a lot cheaper if we didn't include taxes to pay for roads. Of course, you wouldn't have any roads to drive on, and you'd choke on the fumes if you did, but at least you'd die happy knowing there weren't any pesky regulations costing you money.

 

 

 

I understand the economics of it and the ramifications as well. Whether Joe Public is prepared to pay these extra fee's for the extra "value" being provided, is questionable. 

How would you regulate items made in countries like China? How would it even work? How would you compel them to comply and who would police and punish non-compliance?

Until the market wants it, and lets sellers and manufacturers know they expect these standards, then you aren't going to get the improvements you seek. Logistically regulation internationally would be extremely difficult.