Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Security Firm Predicts "Murder By Internet-Connected Devices"

Posted by samzenpus on from the click-and-kill dept.

Curseyoukhan writes "Infosec vendor IID (Internet Identity) probably hopes that by the time 2014 rolls around no one will remember the prediction it just made. That is the year it says we will see the first murder via internet connected device. The ability to do this has been around for quite some time but the company won't say why it hasn't happened yet. Probably because that would have screwed up their fear marketing. CIO blogger challenges them to a $10K bet over their claim."

135 comments

  1. So we are to believe by Andy+Prough · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    that no one has used a car as a murder weapon in the past few years?

    1. Re:So we are to believe by Andy+Prough · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And how many drone strikes have been carried out over the past 10 years?

    2. Re:So we are to believe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > With nearly every device, from healthcare to transportation, being controlled or communicated with in some way via the Internet, IID predicts that criminals will leverage this to carry out murders.

    3. Re:So we are to believe by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And how many drone strikes have been carried out over the past 10 years?

      The drones aren't connected to the internet, only military networks. Any peripheral traffic that happens to route anywhere out into the internet is on a secured VPN... and at that, it's only sensitive material, nothing that'll say, start world war three. The same cannot be said for, say, nuclear reactors and related industrial equipment (like centrifuges)... which apparently are. All that out of the way, who really cares what a couple of rich dudes do with their gambling money? But in the larger sense, yes, it will happen eventually as if there's one thing you can bet on long-term is that we'll find more creative ways to kill each other...

      All this boils down to is one person betting on "sooner" and the other on "later".

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    4. Re:So we are to believe by khasim · · Score: 1

      Even worse than that!!!

      Examples include a pacemaker that can be tuned remotely, ...

      Fear your pacemaker!!! People with heart problems will now have an increased risk of death!!!

      Uh. Well you know what I mean. Fear!!!

      ... an Internet-connected car that can have its control systems altered, ...

      Why would my car need a two-way comm channel on the Internet? I can possibly see reporting but accepting input? Why?

      ... or an IV drip that can be shut off with a click of a mouse.

      See the comments about the pacemaker above.

      So what they're really "predicting" is that some engineer at some medical supply company will get REALLY stupid and build in some back-door-thing that will open the company up to all kinds of lawsuits.

      Yeah, I can see that happening. Eventually. Once. And when that company is sued out of existence then, hopefully, we'll all learn that not everything needs access to Facebook.

    5. Re:So we are to believe by sFurbo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why would my car need a two-way comm channel on the Internet? I can possibly see reporting but accepting input? Why?

      For providing entertainment and map, weather and traffic updates. That shouldn't be able to spill into the controls, but you never know.

    6. Re:So we are to believe by aneroid · · Score: 2

      Examples include a pacemaker that can be tuned remotely, ...

      Fear your pacemaker!!! People with heart problems will now have an increased risk of death!!!

      Uh. Well you know what I mean. Fear!!!

      I think "death by wifi enabled pacemaker" is most likely. It was covered previously, so now it's just a matter of time and effort for someone actually do it. Well, it's also required that someone with a pacemaker is hated enough by someone else who has access to get the serial number, etc. and then go through with murdering him/her or find someone else with the skills and inclination. That reduces your population of potential perpetrators.

      Is it possible this will happen? Yes.
      In the next 24 months? Yes.
      Will it be found or proved? Probably not.

    7. Re:So we are to believe by aneroid · · Score: 1

      I think "death by wifi enabled pacemaker" is most likely.

      s/death/murder

    8. Re:So we are to believe by deoxyribonucleose · · Score: 2

      Why would my car need a two-way comm channel on the Internet? I can possibly see reporting but accepting input? Why?

      For providing entertainment and map, weather and traffic updates. That shouldn't be able to spill into the controls, but you never know.

      Not to mention enabling higher power profiles for the ECM's on a rental basis: selling such value added services directly to consumers has been something of a holy Grail for the car industry. If they could only lock out those pesky chip trimming shops.... The possibility for remote sabotage is one reason such services haven't taken off yet.

    9. Re:So we are to believe by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 3, Informative

      You should keep in mind that a lot of those are already possible. Lots of medical equipment runs on windows despite the EULA saying "don't use this for life-saving devices". A few years ago a few researchers demonstrated that it was possible to access a car with wifi, disable the brakes, and engage the accelerator.

      The idiot engineers that design these things don't bother implementing 1-way data transfer (e.g. allow car to report engine statistics but don't allow reprogramming remotely), encryption, or any security measures at all. They rely entirely on obscurity to prevent these devices being used maliciously.

      Until someone dies, it's not a problem. When someone does die, they have enough lawyers to prevent the family that just lost someone from suing them.

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    10. Re:So we are to believe by wierd_w · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One major vector that would be ripe for abuse would be a combination of "self driving car", + "malicious GPS map update".

      Eg, the self driving car would have sensors to determine it is on an actual road, of course. But that doesn't stop the car from autodriving off an unfinished bypass rampway, when its map software says the road is finished.

      This wouldn't necessarily be able to target a specific vehicle without a pretty sophisticated man in the middle attack, (how you would do that is questionable in and of itself, perhaps if you put the middleman directly ON the car? Malicious android device, or a raspberry pi? But if you do that, why not just put a pipebomb like normal terrorists would?) But would work with a remote DNS injection attack against an entire vehicle product line, with disasterous effects all over. The attacker just needs to know when vehicles contact the map server, poison the DNS for the server, and then serve the malicious maps to updating vehicles when they connect.

    11. Re:So we are to believe by Ranguvar · · Score: 1

      The point murder in a legal sense, something someone could be tried for murder over.
      And yes, legal meaning whatever bullshit happens to be in law as what murder is.
      IANAL, but drones are being treated as legal, at least for now.

    12. Re:So we are to believe by dynamo · · Score: 1

      Just because it is "treated as legal" for now by the same government that is doing the strikes does not make it actually legal.
      Someone should be tried for murder in many of these cases.

    13. Re:So we are to believe by evil_aaronm · · Score: 2

      I agree, in principle. However, it's reality that counts, and in reality, the murderers will get away with it because of who they are. Just like abusive cops will get away with their abuses. It sucks, but double-standards always do.

    14. Re:So we are to believe by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Covered here too

    15. Re:So we are to believe by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      EULA's are different for different licenses. How do you know the one for the medical equipment says that?

    16. Re:So we are to believe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      malicious GPS map update

      Wasn't there a news story about some people who got lost and starved to death because of the iPhone maps?

    17. Re:So we are to believe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I would hope that self driving cars would be able to see if they are about to drive off an unfinished bypass whether or not the map says it is finished.

    18. Re:So we are to believe by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      Unless someone logged into their car remotely, and used it drive into someone with the intent to murder someone, I don't think that's what they're talking about. Or maybe you think that killing someone by smashing my smartphone into their head counts too.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    19. Re:So we are to believe by alex67500 · · Score: 1

      Even worse than that!!!

      Examples include a pacemaker that can be tuned remotely, ...

      Fear your pacemaker!!! People with heart problems will now have an increased risk of death!!!

      I take it you haven't watched Homeland?

    20. Re:So we are to believe by hoboroadie · · Score: 1

      When someone does die, they have enough lawyers to prevent the family that just lost someone from suing them.

      They'll get sued, the lawyers are to ensure that the settlement will be inadequate, e.g., the company will remain in business.

      --
      They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
    21. Re:So we are to believe by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The same cannot be said for, say, nuclear reactors and related industrial equipment (like centrifuges)... which apparently are.

      In which country? Iranian equipment was not internet connected, its enemies had to infect it via USB flash drives. Which countries have worse security at nuclear facilities than Iran?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    22. Re:So we are to believe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, proof of concept is out there in the real world, MIT published it several years ago. You can bet it's been done by now. It's in the hackerspace now, already proven.
      And i would bet, with the new near field communicatons, using bluetooth protocals, or such, you could call a target from the internet, and easily stop the medical device, or reprogram the device as the article says. Just as real bad guys would do. The doctors that wrote the article were not predicting, And were probably late to the party, but showed a concept that governments, may have been exploiting, Remember about 2000, when two way communicatins was blamed for car stalling on the freeway in LA, causing accidents. Remember how the last week or so you are now hearing of the "improvements" to new cars will include the ability of the car to send and recieve information, and for the car to react to it, and you do not believe in black hats? Or tinfoil?

    23. Re:So we are to believe by ATMAvatar · · Score: 1

      And when that company is sued out of existence then, hopefully, we'll all learn that not everything needs access to Facebook.

      But what better way to monitor vial signs than through tweets?

      --
      "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
    24. Re:So we are to believe by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      I hear about this one GPS that failed to say wait for ferry and showed the road as going though

    25. Re:So we are to believe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to actually talk to some physicians, geektard - because you are so out of your depth on those comments it isnt worth trying to correct.

    26. Re:So we are to believe by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      But it isn't considered illegal by enough countries either..

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    27. Re:So we are to believe by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      In principle we call anyone over 18 in Pakistan "militants" and we call folks whose names show up during investigation of a terrorist sect or known terrorist operative "suspected terrorists," and claim victory when they die in drone strikes. Suspect = criminal, adult = enemy combatant. And both sides love the drone strikes, so Fox and CNN both refuse to call out our administration for this bunglefuck shit. They get all angry when "a 14 year old girl" who may in fact be a fucking sociopathic mass-murder craving killer goes on a "death list" because she's young and female and cute, but they don't say a whisper of a word about the blatant manipulative accounting of our government's continuous incidental and intentional murders of plain civilians.

      --
      Support my political activism on Patreon.
    28. Re:So we are to believe by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      Consider the following:

      A vehicle with forward facing sensor cameras will "percieve" that the road "suddenly ends" when cresting a very steep hill, because the top of the hill obstructs the camera's view of the road surface, and the road sharply descends after the crest. (Think, colorado, or just mountains in general.) Also, sharp turn in road behind visual obstacle. (Tall building, rock cliff wall, concrete abuttment, etc.)

      To prevent the car from stopping dead on the highway, the vehicle has to make an educated guess about if it should proceed or not.

      Does the map say the road goes through?
      Does the miltiaxis accellerometer say the vehicle is embarking a steep incline?
      Are there special "helper" metadata fields available from the map to Improve autodrive functions? (Like, say in TomTom maps, where there is data about speed limits, toll charges, et al.)

      The vehicle has to decide if it is going to stop and rouse the drunken/sleeping driver when it approaches the crest of the steep incline, or rounds the very sharp turn of the bypass's cloverleaf off-ramp. (Or on-ramp)

      Users will be 'upset' if the car whines too frequently. As such, stopping in the road and whining is a good way to get bad customer reviews. This means the car will do absolutely everything it can to determine if it should simply just go or not.

      The malicious cyber-terrorist (gawd I hate that term btw..) would have done his/her research before going to the expense and legal jeapoardy of doing the DNS poison + false map server exploit. His maps will be jammed full of metadata to assure the vehicle's logic that it should "just go", and that being unable to see roadway after the cutoff of the deadly trap on ramp is "expected", and "normal". The car will dutifully follow its heuristic program, and drive off the edge, fully confident that its data is reliable and safe.

      Even if the vehicle balks, if it is going at highway speeds, stopping in time to avert disaster is not garanteed, especially if inclement conditions (like ice) are present.

      Sometime last night though, I had an idea for how to perform a specific user attack, via a locally present middleman.

      A malware infected android smartphone.

      The smartphone enables its hotspot capability, or bluetooth capability, and then serves as the connection over which the vehicle attempts a map update. The malware already likely has access to the local phonebook store (so many legit titles demand that for some reason!), and can use that information to identify a specific target, for a specific map delivery.

      Unlike a carbomb, this does not require physical access to the vehicle by the attacker, but only requires the victim to carry the phone inside the vehicle themselves, as many people already do. The smartphone has a much larger attack surface than does the vehicle's navigation system, and so is easier to compromise remotely.

      (However, if you wanted to target, say, a senator, you should use a bogus iOS app instead. ;) )

    29. Re:So we are to believe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We leeched warez off a dumpsite in a Russian nuclear facility back in the early 2000's. Dunno if any of the critical systems were physically connected to the same network, though - I'd hope not.

    30. Re:So we are to believe by snemarch · · Score: 1

      So what they're really "predicting" is that some engineer at some medical supply company will get REALLY stupid and build in some back-door-thing that will open the company up to all kinds of lawsuits.

      Yeah, I can see that happening. Eventually. Once. And when that company is sued out of existence then, hopefully, we'll all learn that not everything needs access to Facebook.

      "backdoor" -> "remote code execution bug". Discuss.

      --
      Coffee-driven development.
    31. Re:So we are to believe by cusco · · Score: 1

      You really have to stop confusing The Onion with Fox News.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    32. Re:So we are to believe by cusco · · Score: 1

      The description is vague enough that using an internet-connected IP camera to know when to set off the WiFi-connected car bomb would certainly qualify. If someone in Colombia or Mexico hasn't done that yet I'd be extremely surprised.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    33. Re:So we are to believe by Genda · · Score: 1

      I would call that a Darwin Award Winner...

  2. My prediction by Osgeld · · Score: 1, Troll

    By 2014 this bullshit of connecting your toaster to the cloud will be a fad, and not many people will actually care to sign in to see how many farts they tweeted

    1. Re:My prediction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By 2014 this bullshit of connecting your toaster to the cloud will be a fad, and not many people will actually care to sign in to see how many farts they tweeted

      The former prediction, yes, most likely

      The latter factoid? You sad, naive person, vastly underestimating the desire of some people to be recognized but not have much to say.

  3. First post people!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    I've got the first post!!! How do you feel about it?!?

    1. Re:First post people!!! by BronsCon · · Score: 3, Funny

      Like maybe 2013 might be the year of murder by internet-connected device.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    2. Re:First post people!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      At least, thankfully, it's not the year of the Linux Desktop.

  4. It's been a few years since this was on QDB... by tangent3 · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...but it looks like [SA]HatfulOfHollow has finally completed his killer device.... http://www.bash.org/?4281

    1. Re:It's been a few years since this was on QDB... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He had a beta version years ago. I believe it was in swordfish form.

  5. Not a problem by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Don't worry, my run-away killer AI drone will stop it in time.

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
  6. I gotta say: by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Funny

    Goatse certainly came close

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
    1. Re:I gotta say: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Killing your innocence doesn't count.

    2. Re:I gotta say: by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      Never mind 2 Girls 1 Cup worked :)

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    3. Re:I gotta say: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ugh...of all the crap I've seen on the internet, it was 2 Girls 1 Cup that made me spontaneously projectile vomit.

  7. Not the first... just the first real one. by NeoStrider69 · · Score: 1

    I could be wrong, but didn't someone already write a TV show episode where something like this did happen? I think it was NCIS.

    1. Re:Not the first... just the first real one. by Dins · · Score: 1

      Homeland

    2. Re:Not the first... just the first real one. by loufoque · · Score: 0

      Oh my god, confusing Homeland with a shitty generic show like NCIS.
      You don't deserve to own a TV.

    3. Re:Not the first... just the first real one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see how you could watch that crap. FEAR, FEAR, Bigger Gun God FEAR

    4. Re:Not the first... just the first real one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hahahahaha you got your shitty shows mixed up! Here's a hint: they are both absolute shit and inaccurate as can be.

    5. Re:Not the first... just the first real one. by gagol · · Score: 2

      I am confused, are you talking about NCIS or Homeland? Both shows are really not the best in my opinion. Nothing like Dexter, Breaking Bad or Shameless (UK, of course).

      --
      Tomorrow is another day...
  8. Gotta have balls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To place bets on the predicting of the outcome of a future murder.

  9. I've seen this before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Their prediction sounds awfully familiar, I wonder if they might have been watching old Tom Selleck movies while drunk. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runaway_(1984_film)

    1. Re:I've seen this before by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The American detective series did something neat in "Columbo Goes to College" (1990) too.
      A remote control gun in a car truck is used, while sitting in class listening a guest lecture.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    2. Re:I've seen this before by mangu · · Score: 2

      Bad luck film producer. Plans to make the major science fiction film of the year, releases it in the same year as The Terminator.

    3. Re:I've seen this before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF? Tom Selleck, Gene Simmons, Kirstie Alley, in a Michael Crichton film. Why the fuck have I never seen this?

    4. Re:I've seen this before by greg1104 · · Score: 1

      "Runaway" is a free video on Amazon Prime--for good reasons.

    5. Re:I've seen this before by I+Mean,+What · · Score: 1

      Ha ha ha that's sarcasm right? Yeah, yeah it is.

  10. Viral Markerting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for Sword Art Online

  11. I see a new patent in your future by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Device and apparatus to deliver internet inside a person's neck or skull.

    Mode of application: (1) Take one internet connected smartphone or tablet (iPad mini works good) (2) Apply sharp end to target face or neck (3) Apply sufficient force at other end of device (4) Observe penetration of organic carbon-based bag of meat (5) Ensure said organic carbon-based bag of meat contents are being expunged near the area of contact with said internet connected apparatus (6) Borrow valuables indefinitely (also recover said internet connected apparatus, those things are expensive as heck) (7) ??? (8) Profit bitches!!!

  12. Already been a novel about this... by APL+bigot · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Murder via internet (and a lot more), committed by someone who is dead. "Daemon" by Daniel Suarez. Interesting read. There is also a sequel, "Freedom".

    --
    Heisenberg may have been here.
    1. Re:Already been a novel about this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. Beat me to it. Great novel.

    2. Re:Already been a novel about this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suspect they've just watched the last series of Homeland and lightbulb went off in their head going 'kerching".

    3. Re:Already been a novel about this... by Morpf · · Score: 2

      In Germany the official sequel to "Daemon" is called "Dark Net" not "Freedom", if you are interested in a read. ;) I don't now why they changed the name, though.

    4. Re:Already been a novel about this... by APL+bigot · · Score: 1

      Nope. "Daemon" was copyright 2009. Which you should have checked before posting.

      --
      Heisenberg may have been here.
  13. Hasn't it happened numerous times already? by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Most remotely-triggered bombs made by extremists of various kinds are triggered by cellphones - so true in fact that some countries shut down their cell networks preventively. Cellphones use some kind of radio network and proprietary protocol for the last mile, but essentially, beyond that, telephony is entirely IP-based these days. You can even call a cellphone from a PC now with programs like Skype.

    So I think essentially all recent bombing attacks can be called "murder by internet-connected devices".

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:Hasn't it happened numerous times already? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pretty obvious that the people making this prediction are talking about products which are not designed to kill people while the murderer has reasonable expectation of getting away with it, all because the internet gave said product functionality only the murderer thought of.

      Take medical equipment used in the home, for instance. Sure, authorities would probably figure out what is happening pretty quickly, but at least a few people might still get away with it.

    2. Re:Hasn't it happened numerous times already? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      Most remotely-triggered bombs made by extremists of various kinds are triggered by cellphones

      A remotely-triggered bomb maker extremist had his head blown off . . . by a cellphone: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahya_Ayyash

      With a wee bit of dramatic irony, as well . . .

      No Internets were harmed in the process.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    3. Re:Hasn't it happened numerous times already? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Telephony may be IP based in the backbones, but for the users, that is still the exception. It's still mostly POTS for landlines, and more or less the same protocols ISDN used over various air interfaces (with some additional overhead for roaming etc.). 4G cellphones would be IP based, but aren't for now, since nobody has picked a suitable standard - they switch to 3G for voice communication.

    4. Re:Hasn't it happened numerous times already? by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      Nice story.... I love how the Isrealis don't bother with arrest and trial, they just stoop right to assasination.... its nice having a conflict where this is no moral authority on any side. Makes it easy to just sit back and enjoy it as they kill eachother.

      But its true, no internet connection on phones in 1995.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    5. Re:Hasn't it happened numerous times already? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not murder when coercive authority does it.

  14. I thought 2014 by Andy+Prough · · Score: 2

    was for sure going to be the year of Desktop Linux. Instead it's going to be the year of internet murders? Don't tell me we have to wait until Enlightenment 0.18 is fully baked?

  15. where the fuck did my internet hammer go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    gosh darn
    guess ill just have to type letters at ya

  16. Already happened by jamesh · · Score: 1

    Depending on your definition of "via internet device" all someone has to do is beat someone to death with a cell phone, or a laptop, or even run them down with a reasonably modern car. There's a good chance this has already happened.

    If the definition is that the act of murder is committed remotely via the internet (a more reasonable definition), then I'm sure some bright spark will arm a civilian drone and do their deed that way. Already been done by the military, obviously, but I don't think that falls under the formal definition of "murder" if it was done during wartime, FWIW to the victim.

    Another possibility is an industrial targeted virus (eg stuxnet-like) causing equipment to blow up and causing death to anyone nearby.

    1. Re:Already happened by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the definition is: "remotely, by breaking into a device that is not normally under the control of the murderer".

    2. Re:Already happened by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Internet enabled toasters, death by toaster!

      Internet enabled furnace, burned alive by evil hacker!

      Internet enabled door, choked when he peeked in!

      So many possibilities!

    3. Re:Already happened by Platinumrat · · Score: 2

      Someone just needs to slap a patent on this Murder "with a internet connected device" and wait for the royalties to come in.

  17. That's too much work. by Andy+Prough · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hasn't Apple already murdered tons of people people in the Australian desert simply by sticking "Mildura" in the wrong spot? I'm sure of it. Either that or those Maps "victims" were awfully inconvenienced, probably missing their favorite reality TV shows, which is nearly as bad.

    1. Re:That's too much work. by gnasher719 · · Score: 1, Funny

      Hasn't Apple already murdered tons of people people in the Australian desert simply by sticking "Mildura" in the wrong spot? I'm sure of it. Either that or those Maps "victims" were awfully inconvenienced, probably missing their favorite reality TV shows, which is nearly as bad.

      In my village, two people were killed because they followed Google's instructions to get to the pub, which was in the middle of the cricket field. During a game. They annoyed the players so much they were clubbed to death. (The deaths are not true, the pub in the middle of the cricket field on Google maps is).

    2. Re:That's too much work. by Andy+Prough · · Score: 1

      They will die eventually. So, someday, your story will be true: "They followed Google Maps ... and later (years, decades - who cares?) they died". Good enough for a news headline?

  18. It's been done already. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Alot of pacemakers have wireless with none or simple security... (why i have no fucking clue why we did that...)

    100% undetectable too. Heart problems in a person with a pacemaker is not suspicious at all.

    1. Re:It's been done already. by anagama · · Score: 1

      Chain mail body suit as farady cage?

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    2. Re:It's been done already. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A brand new pacemaker that fails, however, IS suspicious.

    3. Re:It's been done already. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you know if it's not the signal coming in that is keeping you alive?

  19. 10,000 Dollars? by GeekWithAKnife · · Score: 0

    For a bet? on murder?
    *blinks*
    Sounds like a contract to me.

    --
    A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
  20. Technical definition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    What about telepresence medicine? I can see remote-operated machinery adding a layer of legal misdirection to doctor-assisted suicide attempts.

  21. By AI? by nicknamesarefunny · · Score: 0

    Unlikely, but I think quite a few deaths (not murders) may be caused because of bugs in the code controlling these machines.

  22. Nice bet by famebait · · Score: 1

    I'm sure they can't wait to put them selves in a position to very publically benefit financially from the first such murder...

    --
    sudo ergo sum
  23. No online murder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who says no one ever did it? The only thing we can be reasonably sure about is no one was ever caught doing it... and lived to tell the story...

    whahahahaha

  24. Fools and the fools that fool them by Ignacio · · Score: 1

    Virtual nobody posts sensationalistic headline to grow mindshare, news at 11.

    1. Re:Fools and the fools that fool them by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

      has been laments loss of mindshare, news at 12

  25. Online Remote Operated Surgery by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 2

    Given that more & more surgery is being done remotely over the internet surely Windows Automatic Update has already achieved this!

    --

    Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

  26. Could have already happened. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There are already numerous reports of virus infections of hospital systems.

    The only remaining question is whether or not an improper drug dispensing activity occurred at the same time time, with the same system.

    1. Re:Could have already happened. by famebait · · Score: 1

      That would be manslaughter.

      --
      sudo ergo sum
  27. Quelle Suprise by TractorBarry · · Score: 2

    Firm with vested interest in selling you "stuff" is *very* concerned that "stuff" might happen. Buy now whilst stocks last !

    --
    Sky subscribers are morons. They pay to be advertised at !
  28. Facebook by darkfeline · · Score: 2

    I predict that someone will come up with the bright idea of hooking up some medical device to Facebook. It will seem like a "good idea at the time" to someone for some reason only god knows. One of the guy's friends will submit a score challenge for a Facebook game, and trip some godforsaken undocumented bug in the API, causing the device to malfunction. All of a sudden, it will become a lot more important to have a high score in <insert game here>.

  29. Probably already happened by mseeger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    IID predicts for 2013 that criminals will leverage networked healthcare devices to carry out murders. My counter-theory is, that the first murder probably has already occurred; we and the police just didn't notice it. So 2013 may be the year the first murder via Internet device is proven.

    During a BKA (German version of the FBI) conference, i made a remark that got me nationwide media attention in 2000: "In the Internet you'll find anything but murder." I wish i could say this with the same conviction today as i did back then (http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/BKA-hat-Muehe-mit-der-Internet-Kriminalitaet-16354.html).

    I think those happy days Daniel Suarez envisioned have already arrived.

  30. You're all doomed! You'll be killed by your PC! by euyis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    An "Infosec" vendor that no one knows and cares makes big prediction about how future hackers would kill you with compromised Internet devices. You need protection! We offer it! Remember our name so we stay relevant!

    I would probably consider this news (that is in no way interesting and informative) if this prediction is made by Symantec, McAfee or Kaspersky. Put some obscure "IID" here and it just smells so slash-PR.

  31. Sounds like something from the 90s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    In particular "Killer Net" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0127383/

    Everything took longer though as they were all on dial up.

  32. What kind of devices are they thinking off? by Deus.1.01 · · Score: 1

    Knives wielding USB gadgets?

    http://achewood.com/index.php?date=01122007

    Besides cartoon characters who on earth would be dense enough to.... ...
    Oh GOD!...Thinkgeek will destroy us all!

    --
    My -1 Troll is actually a +1 funny. And my -1 flame is actually a +1 insightfull.
    1. Re:What kind of devices are they thinking off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh GOD!...Thinkgeek will destroy us all!

      Mod Parent Up

  33. Doh! by Zedrick · · Score: 2

    I came up with this idea about 3 years ago, when working with network cameras. Should have patented something right away.

    1. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a bit late to the thought.

      Death by cameras connected to the Internet was already thought of in 2004 when The Concrete Jungle was published.

      The short story is even available online under a Creative Commons license.

  34. Too late. by neoshroom · · Score: 1

    Too late.

    In 2012 Pakistan shut down their cell phone networks for a period of time . The reason they did this was to prevent bombings, which often use a cell phone as their trigger.

    Almost all cell phones now are connected to the internet, even the very cheap ones.

    Thus, the year it says we will see the first murder via an internet connected device likely has already happened.

    What they mean to say is the first murder via an internet connected device that uses the internet itself to commit the murder.

    But really, some of those cell phones go off when sent a text. It really is barely different for them to go off when receiving an email and more modern phones like the iPhone's texts go over the internet anyway. Even though these people are using much cheaper models, it could easily have already happened.

    --
    Big apple, new Yorik, undig it, something's unrotting in Edenmark.
  35. There's no doubt. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While most scenarios they described are technically silly, there is at least no doubt that our cars will be computer controlled and connected to the Internet (and each other) in the not-so-distant future.

  36. So what.... by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

    In the USA, millions and millions of people have guns that could easily be used to murder anybody. In Western countries in general, almost everybody has kitchen knifes that could easily be used to murder someone. I have a spade and a pitchfork that could be used for murder. Why would I worry that about "Murder by Internet-Connected Devices"?

    1. Re:So what.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would I worry that about "Murder by Internet-Connected Devices"?

      Because this could be the first step in an awesome cyberpunk world, where our firewalls fry the brains of script kiddies on a regular basis.

    2. Re:So what.... by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      In the USA, millions and millions of people have guns that could easily be used to murder anybody. In Western countries in general, almost everybody has kitchen knifes that could easily be used to murder someone. I have a spade and a pitchfork that could be used for murder. Why would I worry that about "Murder by Internet-Connected Devices"?

      You're naming a bunch of ways of physically attacking someone. That requires physical access.

      With an Internet-enabled method this isn't required. All the locks on the door and guards in the world wont stop the perpetrator in this scenario unless you stop your Facebook addiction. Hey, you could murder them from outside the legal jurisdiction. Even from a country with internet access and no extradition agreements with the place where the murder took place. Assuming the authorities are able to figure out who the culprit is they've preemptively escaped.

  37. My brother put me in hospital twice... by rHBa · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...with the TV remote control, that's when we were 8-9 years old. I'm pretty sure he could kill me these days with some blunt piece of electronics

    1. Re:My brother put me in hospital twice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...with the TV remote control, that's when we were 8-9 years old. I'm pretty sure he could kill me these days with some blunt piece of electronics

      you'd think that after the first time your parents would tape over your IR port! Fool me once.... shame on, shame on you. Fool me twice..... can't get fooled again!

      sig

  38. I call meh by TheCarp · · Score: 1

    Yes and? It hasn't happened because...well... there isn't a high demand for murder. Not many people want to engage in it (really, I mean, everyone says it when blowing off steam but, very few would actually do it, even if handed means and opportunity).

    Planned murders like you see in movies are, by far, the exception. Not just the exception but the exceptional case of an already rare occurance. In a major city, 100-200 murders a year seems on the mid range to high side from a casual perusal of the numbers.... in populations of a million or more?

    I don't doubt that it WILL happen, and I don't doubt that someone WILL get caught doing it. However, thats almost like rule 34.... of course its going to happen.... eventually. Someone is going to murder some people with a home built drone too.... ill put that prediction right out there too. It is going to happen, theres just too many people for it not to happen eventually.

    However, its going to be a long time before its easier to kill someone with your internet connection than it is to grab a sharp object and shove it into their chest....or to accelerate lead slugs at them at high velocities... and it will continue to be easier to do these manually than with robots.... so I expect these to remain the extreme rare exception.

    So....meh.

    --
    "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  39. Mrs Apple, in the Man Cave with the iPad by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

    What are we talking about here? When my wife beats me to death with her iPad because I've been too busy playing Far Cry 3 for the past 2 weeks to take out the garbage or bathe?

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  40. The Columbine Coefficient by rmdingler · · Score: 1

    We can be certain of one thing: The proliferation of this idea increases the probability of it's implementation an order of magnitude.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

  41. RTFA by hoboroadie · · Score: 1

    The author offered $1000 at 10:1 to the FUDsters that put this nonsense out in the first place.
    Yeah, I had to look.

    --
    They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
  42. It won't happen often by lc_overlord · · Score: 1

    Thankfully the group of people who commit premeditated murder and people with the geeky skills to kill over the Internet rarely overlap.
    It's the same with terrorism, people who commit those acts aren't exactly the brightest bulbs in the room, just imagine what a bunch of brilliant, well funded engineers could do.
    Think invisible flying death bots.

    O, we already got those, never mind then. :)

    --
    - "There is nothing quite like an ineffective solution to an nonexistant problem"
  43. Old! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.geeksaresexy.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/computer_bomb.jpg

    1. Re:Old! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you, I was worried all these young scamps had never seen that one!

      http://www.geeksaresexy.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/computer_bomb.jpg

  44. Damn you USB Turkey Carver! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Now I know why you needed access through my firewall...

  45. Lot's of ways to do it .... by Bravoc · · Score: 1

    In his fictional book "Daemon" , Daniel Suarez showed lots of ways that Internet connected devices can whack people. Many of them are not that far fetched.

  46. Guess what? *You* are an internet-connected device by rocket+rancher · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure that the implied distinction between a human with an internet connection and a violent impulse, and a lethal device controlled by said human via an internet connection, is a valid one. Violent criminals can and do use the net to stalk their victims, acquire weapons, and research successful strategies to commit their crimes. Humans are still in the loop whether they are pulling the trigger while standing next to the victim, or while they are sitting in their mom's basement. IMHO, changing the location of the human in the loop is, at best, a distinction without merit.

  47. it is already been accomplished by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that's right itches,
    it's already been accomplished for entertainment purposes
    the app was so good, it was only possible to record the show on external video camera

  48. Well... by gagol · · Score: 1

    In this case, the driver should not be behind a wheel, it displays a complete lack of judgement. Or it is an urban legend. Sadly, I do not think it is an urban legend...

    --
    Tomorrow is another day...
  49. I gotta Say - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The idea should be patented and passed on to a troll !

  50. Someone finally finished watching Homeland by flibbidyfloo · · Score: 1

    I guess I'm not the only one that finally finished watching the recent season of Homeland. Internet controlled pacemaker, anyone?

  51. this has been happening since 1995 by NynexNinja · · Score: 1

    Remote controlled Predator drones have been used to kill thousands of people since the mid 1990's, does that qualify?

  52. and in other news..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Murder by letter, murder by wired telephone, murder by flower from flower delivery man.

  53. Scenario by PPH · · Score: 1

    Photoshop someone burning a Koran.
    Upload to YouTube.

    The End.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  54. Surely this has already been done... by skaralic · · Score: 1

    I'm sure someone has been pummelled to death with an old 90s desktop while the ethernet cable was still connected. :D

  55. Will happen? by whitroth · · Score: 0

    http://inhomelandsecurity.com/teen_hacker_in_poland_plays_tr/
    http://paranoidnews.org/2011/11/hackers-take-control-of-a-water-pump-in-illinois-and-disrupt-public-water-system/

    And there's one more I can't seem to google, where a British train was derailed, and one or more death may have occured, because some 16 yr old "hacker" had gotten into the rail company's switching system (WHICH WAS ON THE 'NET!!!!!), and changed switch setting at the wrong time. This would have been in the last 8 years or so.....

                mark

  56. It's called a drone..... by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

    ....fuckwit! (Most moderators today here are corporate fascist state worshipping script kiddies)

  57. You are claiming..... by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

    ....that those military networks aren't Internet-connected? You are a moron!

    1. Re:You are claiming..... by DanielNS84 · · Score: 0

      Being in the military, I can assure you those are all run from either a network called "Centrix" (If it's a shared asset with other nations), or SIPR...and neither of those are connected to the internet like NIPR is.

      --
      Marky Mark Killed Jason Bourne!
  58. Medical by stuffman64 · · Score: 1

    My guess is that it has something to do with medical devices in hospitals. Reprogram a daVinci robot to go all Ginsu?

    --
    --- At my sig, unleash hell.
  59. fridges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't forget those fridges that are connected to the web. They can over heat them and have it explode.