This was a really interesting read, very in depth. It's still unbelievable to me that things done use https. Just setting up that relatively simple step negates a whole stack of basic...
This was a really interesting read, very in depth. It's still unbelievable to me that things done use https. Just setting up that relatively simple step negates a whole stack of basic vulnerabilities. Things that don't use https should come with giant warning labels.
Is this really that surprising? To me, this is obvious. Who buys a $20 tracker and seriously expects it to be secure? I really don't understand the point these researchers were making.
Is this really that surprising? To me, this is obvious. Who buys a $20 tracker and seriously expects it to be secure? I really don't understand the point these researchers were making.
For most people, the concept of "security" doesn't even factor into their purchasing process, and I doubt many consider just how many technical points of failure exist in such a device, so it's...
For most people, the concept of "security" doesn't even factor into their purchasing process, and I doubt many consider just how many technical points of failure exist in such a device, so it's worth highlighting, even if it's obvious to us tech-nerds that no Chinese-made eBay-sold $20 GPS tracker will be remotely secure.
Yeah, I guess I was probably overestimating the average consumer. As someone who has always been interested in tech, even though I've never had a formal education in technology or worked in the...
Yeah, I guess I was probably overestimating the average consumer. As someone who has always been interested in tech, even though I've never had a formal education in technology or worked in the field, it just baffles me that people are comfortable owning something and not having the slightest idea of how it works.
For most people, the concept of "security" doesn't even factor into their purchasing process
This is also a good point that didn't occur to me. But then, how does this study help them, if it's only us tech nerds reading it?
What a fascinating read, thanks for posting!
This was a really interesting read, very in depth. It's still unbelievable to me that things done use https. Just setting up that relatively simple step negates a whole stack of basic vulnerabilities. Things that don't use https should come with giant warning labels.
Is this really that surprising? To me, this is obvious. Who buys a $20 tracker and seriously expects it to be secure? I really don't understand the point these researchers were making.
For most people, the concept of "security" doesn't even factor into their purchasing process, and I doubt many consider just how many technical points of failure exist in such a device, so it's worth highlighting, even if it's obvious to us tech-nerds that no Chinese-made eBay-sold $20 GPS tracker will be remotely secure.
Yeah, I guess I was probably overestimating the average consumer. As someone who has always been interested in tech, even though I've never had a formal education in technology or worked in the field, it just baffles me that people are comfortable owning something and not having the slightest idea of how it works.
This is also a good point that didn't occur to me. But then, how does this study help them, if it's only us tech nerds reading it?