[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Spitballing IoT Security

Subject: Spitballing IoT Security
From: jxh at jxh.com (Jim Hickstein)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 00:07:17 -0500
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

On 10/27/16 22:59, bzs at TheWorld.com wrote:
> What would the manufacturers' response be if this virus had instead
> just shut down, possibly in some cases physically damaged the devices
> or otherwise caused them to cease functioning ever again (wiped all
> their software or broke their bootability), rather than just hijacked
> them for a while?

A virus that kills its host (too much of the time) is not successful.

Follow-Ups:
- Spitballing IoT Security
  - From: bzs at TheWorld.com (bzs at TheWorld.com)
- Spitballing IoT Security
  - From: rsk at gsp.org (Rich Kulawiec)

References:
- Spitballing IoT Security
  - From: lear at ofcourseimright.com (Eliot Lear)
- Spitballing IoT Security
  - From: kmedcalf at dessus.com (Keith Medcalf)
- Spitballing IoT Security
  - From: bzs at TheWorld.com (bzs at TheWorld.com)

Prev by Date: Should abuse mailboxes have quotas?
Next by Date: Large BGP Communities beacon in the wild
Previous by thread: Spitballing IoT Security
Next by thread: Spitballing IoT Security
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread