I try to avoid "smart" appliances and if the manufacturer forces the "smart" stuff, I never enable it. Even my induction hob would like to connect to wifi (no idea what that would be useful for), but that's just not happening.
> If I had to guess where most of this traffic is coming from, it's from compromised smart appliances contributing traffic to proxy networks.
... Is the data earlier in the article supposed to support this hypothesis? I'm not saying it doesn't, but I would really appreciate having more lines drawn and dots connected here. And what sort of checking are people supposed to do, exactly? And how?
This made me realize how many devices I buy once, set up once, and then never think about again. Smart TVs are probably one of the biggest examples of that. It would be interesting if manufacturers had to make software support periods much more obvious before people bought them.
In Europe, the Cyber Resilience Act mandates the manufacturer to:
* Report any security breaches within 72 hours to a public body (country's CSIRT + ENISA).
* for "all products with digital elements [...] including those already placed on the market before 11 December 2027"
Products must be sold with a "secure by default" config, with automated security patching enabled by default (opt-out), with reporting on possible unauthorised access, with data collection minimization (tie-in to GDPR), with an SBOM, with dedicated security testing, with public disclosure of vulnerabilities, …
I wish I never thought of it. Just had a recent Samsung TV update, and now it has to sign in EVERY TIME it turns on. I'm considering how to frame it as a warranty job.
It's worse than that. If you don't add it, what's to stop someone else from adding it? A lot of them are just "press okay and it's added". There's no security and nothing to stop people from adding unclaimed applicances, except distance.
A tech lover has a home full of smart appliances and systems. A tech expert has a computer, a modem, a printer, and a revolver lying next to the printer in case it makes a sound they don't recognize.
What gets me is how honestly horribly written most of these scrapers are. I found one ip in my logs recently that had 50,000 attempts at the same 404, over and over every few seconds.
Yeah, I'm thinking along similar lines. I'm not all that heavily VLAN'd, but I have my devices grouped into IP address ranges with static DHCP assignments, and I'm thinking of restricting internet access for a number of those groupings.
Not op but I have an opensense box and a semi managed switch and an couple of TP-Link omada controlled ap's for wifi.
It can make management a bit difficult if you're not careful, but I have wireguard listening on all the vlans so I can bypass any restrictions on any connection it can get my laptop onto if needed.
> If I had to guess where most of this traffic is coming from, it's from compromised smart appliances contributing traffic to proxy networks.
I find it interesting that we have a moral panic over giving people access to their own smartphones, because if the user has access they may get a virus, with negative knock-on effects on the internet...
...but there is no push to remove the same capabilities from smart appliances. They can do what they want. The user doesn't have access, which appears to be what counts. The appliance has access, so its viruses can do all the same things that have to be forbidden on phones, but that doesn't matter.
There's an interesting potential future where personal computing is illegal, unless you buy a refrigerator for the purpose.
That potential future is inching ever closer to reality.
It was never about users. It's all about the corporations. They want to extract rent from their digital serfs, they want to not lose money due to fraud, piracy or whatever else, they want to push unblockable ads, etc. They have "legitimate interests", also known as lobbying power. To these guys, our interest in maintaining control over our machines, sovereignty over our digital domains, is seen as active hostility.
I think one day we'll need to cryptographically attest that our computers are corporate owned in order to even get an internet connection. It's the corporation's computer, they're just generously allowing us to use it, and only on their terms.
... Is the data earlier in the article supposed to support this hypothesis? I'm not saying it doesn't, but I would really appreciate having more lines drawn and dots connected here. And what sort of checking are people supposed to do, exactly? And how?
* Report any security breaches within 72 hours to a public body (country's CSIRT + ENISA).
* for "all products with digital elements [...] including those already placed on the market before 11 December 2027"
Products must be sold with a "secure by default" config, with automated security patching enabled by default (opt-out), with reporting on possible unauthorised access, with data collection minimization (tie-in to GDPR), with an SBOM, with dedicated security testing, with public disclosure of vulnerabilities, …
https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/cra-summar...
Streaming and "device you can control" are mutually exclusive.
A tech lover has a home full of smart appliances and systems. A tech expert has a computer, a modem, a printer, and a revolver lying next to the printer in case it makes a sound they don't recognize.
Stainless Steel Scrapers - tonight, on Sick Sad World.”
It can make management a bit difficult if you're not careful, but I have wireguard listening on all the vlans so I can bypass any restrictions on any connection it can get my laptop onto if needed.
I find it interesting that we have a moral panic over giving people access to their own smartphones, because if the user has access they may get a virus, with negative knock-on effects on the internet...
...but there is no push to remove the same capabilities from smart appliances. They can do what they want. The user doesn't have access, which appears to be what counts. The appliance has access, so its viruses can do all the same things that have to be forbidden on phones, but that doesn't matter.
There's an interesting potential future where personal computing is illegal, unless you buy a refrigerator for the purpose.
It was never about users. It's all about the corporations. They want to extract rent from their digital serfs, they want to not lose money due to fraud, piracy or whatever else, they want to push unblockable ads, etc. They have "legitimate interests", also known as lobbying power. To these guys, our interest in maintaining control over our machines, sovereignty over our digital domains, is seen as active hostility.
I think one day we'll need to cryptographically attest that our computers are corporate owned in order to even get an internet connection. It's the corporation's computer, they're just generously allowing us to use it, and only on their terms.
Drink verification can.