I remember trying to buy a TV that does not have "smart" functionality a few years ago. It was a chore. Today it seems impossible.
And not just TVs: ovens; refrigerators; dishwashers — all have "smart" options. In fact, it seems that more and more the available non-smart models are only the simpler ones, less performant in ways that are not related to any smart functionality missing.
My non-smart TV was available only with lower resolutions than "smart" models of the same brand.
1/
This really annoys me. I am too well aware of security implications of smart devices.
I do not want to have to manage regular software updates for whatever number of appliances I have at home, or risk somebody using them in a botnet (or worse).
And no, I don't trust their "disable WiFi" menu options either. Seen this setting get enabled without my consent too many times.
I *could* put them on a special VLAN, but 99% of people can't. That's a problem, and not just for them.
2/
In 2016 a router-based Mirai botnet took down Dyn, one of the biggest online infrastructure companies, and many well known websites with it:
https://coar.risc.anl.gov/mirai-attack-dyn-internet-infrastructure/
Mirai mainly targeted home routers.
As early as 2018 there were already botnets that… used CCTV cameras. But of course the predominant media narrative was "hackers attack" instead of "vendors put us at risk":
https://www.vice.com/en/article/9a355p/hackers-are-using-cctv-cameras-to-create-botnet-swarms
But I digress.
With all this in mind, I started thinking of how could this be solved?
3/
@rysiek I agree with the sentiment , I bought a 'safe' TV - and paid extra over the 'smart' model.
However there are devices that _have_ to connect to serve their core purpose - Routers and CCTV cameras are good examples.
What we need is for them to be able to connect safely, work well within a local network and if it makes sense be accessed securely from outside a local network.
This is entirely do-able and legislation is starting to demand it.
@steely_glint oh absolutely.