<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: IoT Devices are more vulnerable in Tech Talk</title>
    <link>https://community.isc2.org/t5/Tech-Talk/IoT-Devices-are-more-vulnerable/m-p/27742#M1781</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I am going to pick up this theme again, despite it being some ago.&amp;nbsp; A recent IEEE Spectrum set of experiments on various devices has proven that many devices, including toys and drones are vulnerable.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/telecom/internet/iot-security-risks-drones-vibrators-iot-devices-kids-toys-vulnerable-to-hacking" target="_blank"&gt;https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/telecom/internet/iot-security-risks-drones-vibrators-iot-devices-kids-toys-vulnerable-to-hacking&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;At which point, do we demand, that all IoT devices are made secure from the outset - we did this internationally with electrical standards - so why not these too?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Caute_cautim&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 07 Sep 2019 05:32:34 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Caute_cautim</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-09-07T05:32:34Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>IoT Devices are more vulnerable</title>
      <link>https://community.isc2.org/t5/Tech-Talk/IoT-Devices-are-more-vulnerable/m-p/17210#M728</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Today's IoT Devices are not secure enough. IoT device connected with medical equipment, connected with smart miter, connected with human body so it can be track on the air/on the wire.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Next get attack can be more sophisticated because it may penetrate IoT devices on the air/&lt;SPAN&gt;on the wire.&lt;/SPAN&gt;.This advanced IoT device should use some encryption while transferring data on the air/&lt;SPAN&gt;on the wire. Similar fashion VPN did.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2018 16:30:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.isc2.org/t5/Tech-Talk/IoT-Devices-are-more-vulnerable/m-p/17210#M728</guid>
      <dc:creator>paul200310</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-12-21T16:30:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: IoT Devices are more vulnerable</title>
      <link>https://community.isc2.org/t5/Tech-Talk/IoT-Devices-are-more-vulnerable/m-p/17499#M751</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Let's be honest, IoT device implementations are not secure enough.&amp;nbsp; Most device RTOSs have security features like TLS available, and items like the removal of default credentials are still required (unless you are in California!)&amp;nbsp; The scary thing about IoT is numbers, the same basic hygiene as applies to any other system will go a HUGE way in protecting them, and the systems to which they are connected.&amp;nbsp; More advanced solutions can use more advanced features, but they come down to same basic ideas.&amp;nbsp; Don't expose services you don't need, and authenticate/authorize all communications.&amp;nbsp; Beyond that you are mostly looking at lifecycle management and ease of operations.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2019 20:33:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.isc2.org/t5/Tech-Talk/IoT-Devices-are-more-vulnerable/m-p/17499#M751</guid>
      <dc:creator>mgorman</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-01-03T20:33:34Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: IoT Devices are more vulnerable</title>
      <link>https://community.isc2.org/t5/Tech-Talk/IoT-Devices-are-more-vulnerable/m-p/27742#M1781</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I am going to pick up this theme again, despite it being some ago.&amp;nbsp; A recent IEEE Spectrum set of experiments on various devices has proven that many devices, including toys and drones are vulnerable.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/telecom/internet/iot-security-risks-drones-vibrators-iot-devices-kids-toys-vulnerable-to-hacking" target="_blank"&gt;https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/telecom/internet/iot-security-risks-drones-vibrators-iot-devices-kids-toys-vulnerable-to-hacking&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;At which point, do we demand, that all IoT devices are made secure from the outset - we did this internationally with electrical standards - so why not these too?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Caute_cautim&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 07 Sep 2019 05:32:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.isc2.org/t5/Tech-Talk/IoT-Devices-are-more-vulnerable/m-p/27742#M1781</guid>
      <dc:creator>Caute_cautim</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-09-07T05:32:34Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

