Slashdot Mirror


Do Embedded Systems Need a Time To Die?

chicksdaddy writes: "Dan Geer, the CISO of In-Q-Tel, has proposed giving embedded devices such as industrial control and SCADA systems a scheduled end-of-life in order to manage a future in which hundreds of billions of them will populate every corner of our personal, professional and lived environments. Individually, these devices may not be particularly valuable. But, together, IoT systems are tremendously powerful and capable of causing tremendous social disruption. 'Is all the technologic dependency, and the data that fuels it, making us more resilient or more fragile?' he wondered. Geer noted the appearance of malware like TheMoon, which spreads between vulnerable home routers, as one example of how a population of vulnerable, unpatchable embedded devices might be cobbled into a force of mass disruption. Geer proposes a novel solution: embedded systems that do not have a means of being (securely) managed and updated remotely should be configured with some kind of 'end of life,' past which they will cease to operate. Allowing embedded systems to 'die' will remove a population of remote and insecure devices from the Internet ecosystem and prevent those devices from falling into the hands of cyber criminals or other malicious actors, Geer argued."

187 comments

  1. Or you could just you know... by Narcocide · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... change the password to something other than the default.

    1. Re:Or you could just you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The issue is when there are exploitable bugs found and the device cannot/won't be updated.

      An example would be the heartbleed bug which could be present on routers. If the model is EOL or the manufacturer is out of business then a firmware update is unlikely, and even if one is made available most people simply don't bother with them unless something isn't working.

      I hate the idea of encouraging planned obsolescence, but I can see where he's coming from.

    2. Re:Or you could just you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Having just recently had my E2500 get infected by theMoon, default passwords are not always the problem. TheMoon gains access because some linksys routers don't check or ask for credentials in some cases allowing attackers to do whatever they like.

    3. Re:Or you could just you know... by gbjbaanb · · Score: 2

      or not have a single default password, each device could have a random one set as default (like how each has a unique MAC address for example) that's printed on the back.

      Oh, and maybe we could make control software that is designed to automatically update remotely.

      Or... radically, we could just not put a network port on them.

    4. Re:Or you could just you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, and maybe we could make control software that is designed to automatically update remotely.

      Which assumes there's still someone around releasing updates

    5. Re:Or you could just you know... by 3247 · · Score: 1

      Which assumes there's still someone around releasing updates

      What about an EOL date that's calculated from the date of the last update?

      No update for 12 months = EOL.

      --
      Claus
    6. Re:Or you could just you know... by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      How about this innovative approach....keep improving products and let the customers decide which risks they are willing to accept or need to remove.

    7. Re:Or you could just you know... by GTRacer · · Score: 2

      Why weren't you running Openwrt?

      Because not everyone can be arsed to buy a commercial product to fill a specific need, choosing one designed for that need, and then removing core software or hardware in order to make it "open". Some people like to buy things without having to re-engineer them when they get home.

      Don't get me wrong. I rooted both my cellphones shortly after purchase, and I have a Linksys home router running custom firmware. I mod things for performance reasons or because it's interesting or enlightening. But not everyone can or should do so. In an ideal world*, the routers would have sane security by default.

      I'll take off my rose-tinted specs now and go back to yelling at the kids on my lawn.

      --
      Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
    8. Re:Or you could just you know... by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      Why weren't you running Openwrt?

      Because not everyone can be arsed to buy a commercial product to fill a specific need, choosing one designed for that need, and then removing core software or hardware in order to make it "open". Some people like to buy things without having to re-engineer them when they get home.

      Don't get me wrong. I rooted both my cellphones shortly after purchase, and I have a Linksys home router running custom firmware. I mod things for performance reasons or because it's interesting or enlightening. But not everyone can or should do so. In an ideal world*, the routers would have sane security by default.

      I'll take off my rose-tinted specs now and go back to yelling at the kids on my lawn.

      OpenWRT is so fucking easy to install and configure (easier than some consumer out-of-the-box experiences, even) that there really is no excuse if you expect a secure local network. If not, just plan on replacing your firewall/router every year or so to counter the threat of unpatched bugs. To each their own.

    9. Re:Or you could just you know... by jeffmeden · · Score: 2

      Which assumes there's still someone around releasing updates

      What about an EOL date that's calculated from the date of the last update?

      No update for 12 months = EOL.

      In an enterprise that sort of management would be fine, but I for one would be pissed to hell if I came home one day and my smart TV refused to turn on because it had gone 12 months with no updates. Like most things, the expectations of performance and security differ in every application, so no single rule will ever solve this.

    10. Re:Or you could just you know... by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      OpenWRT is so fucking easy to install and configure (easier than some consumer out-of-the-box experiences, even) that there really is no excuse if you expect a secure local network.

      No. It's not. To you, or the typical computer tech-savvy /. reader, maybe; but we're not average consumers. My father-in-law is well above average in that he bought a Linksys router rather than depend on the FIOS installed default, and he actually changed the password, but he's not going to reflash it any more than I'm going to rebore my car engine's cylinders with a hand drill. And the various older neighbors who I assist with network stuff, who think the Internet is broken if a web site changes its format, would have no clue whatever.

      The REAL question we should all be asking is, If OpenWRT can be so much better, then why is the commercial stuff *not* better?

    11. Re:Or you could just you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that a lot of these embedded devices are faulty by design.

      The company wants you to upgrade to newer kit, not upgrade the software. You see this a lot with internet routers. The internet has not changed significantly since the 80's, and with the exception of ipv6 (which no consumer ISP is supporting, not even comcast who was running trials) so there was no logical reason to replace any internet hardware unless the physical pipe changed. 10Mbit to 100mbit, to 1gbit. Even then that old hardware often gets reused until there is a power bottleneck.

      Ever buy a stand-alone unmanaged ethernet switch? Can't upgrade it. Do I need to? Nope. The only difference between a router and a unmanaged switch is that the router acts as a security device, thus it's weak. Back in the days of dialup, everyone had a "real" IP address and thus people were being hacked all the damn time.

      So on one side of time and law, people were not protected at all when they were using the internet, and if you wanted to knock someone offline, or an entire ISP offline, you simply needed a larger pipe. Today this has turned into the assholes on 4chan loading up LOIC and targeting their least favorite minecraft server, or something else stupid like the Turkish government.

    12. Re:Or you could just you know... by mlts · · Score: 1

      I've always wanted an e-Ink display on consumer routers. Press a button, up comes the password. When the router is completely reset, the default password is randomly re-generated [1], and shown on the display. Of course, this is easily changed, but it would help ensure that router "A" isn't going to have the same default as "B", and that if someone hands the router to another party after it is reset, the previous party won't be privy to the default passcode.

      I've wondered what happened to "data diode" technology. Yes, you can pay a large chunk of change for one. However, for low volumes of data, it is hard to beat two computers connected by a serial cable with the return wire cut, to ensure that data only goes one way. This provides the needed monitoring info, but blackhats won't be able to get past the serial cable without physical access or social engineering.

      For more data than that I've thought of using a signal-level Ethernet tap (one that doesn't have a MAC address since it allows one machine to sniff traffic on the signal level) as another method of moving data one day. However, there is something simple and assured about a serial cable.

      As for updates, sticking a SD card [2] into a computer, copying a signed flash image, sticking that into the embedded system, and telling it to shutdown and reflash isn't difficult [3]. It isn't as easy as autoupdates, but it will keep a degree of separation that is needed for security. Plus one doesn't really want autoupdates on a SCADA system. It is a bad practice to autoupdate anything production, much less a system as expensive as embedded machinery.

      [1]: Regenerated using some basic sane password rules to slow down guessing, of course.

      [2]: USB devices can present themselves as anything. A SD card is always a drive.

      [3]: Would be nice if the system had a way to handle multiple firmwares. That way, if the firmware was corrupted, one could go back to the previous. Ideally, there should be a "1.0" firmware burned into a ROM that cannot be altered, then 2-3 places for update ROMs.

    13. Re:Or you could just you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and yet it has bricked two of my routers, No thanks.

      I have since replaced those with Apple Time Capsules, which OMG Supports IPv6 out of the box.

      I have nothing against OpenWRT, but it's neither easy to install or recover on an update.

    14. Re:Or you could just you know... by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Informative

      and it's easy to do. every polycom comes with the admin password set to the serial number of the unit. Any programmer that made it out of the first year of college could easily add this feature during firmware initialization.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    15. Re:Or you could just you know... by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      I have thrown away 4 or 5 routers in the past 2 years (and gotten a nice service call fee for doing so) thanks to guys like you saying that shit only for OpenWRT to totally brick the router...thanks, keep up the good work!

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    16. Re:Or you could just you know... by jeffmeden · · Score: 0

      OpenWRT is so fucking easy to install and configure (easier than some consumer out-of-the-box experiences, even) that there really is no excuse if you expect a secure local network.

      No. It's not. To you, or the typical computer tech-savvy /. reader, maybe; but we're not average consumers. My father-in-law is well above average in that he bought a Linksys router rather than depend on the FIOS installed default, and he actually changed the password, but he's not going to reflash it any more than I'm going to rebore my car engine's cylinders with a hand drill. And the various older neighbors who I assist with network stuff, who think the Internet is broken if a web site changes its format, would have no clue whatever.

      The REAL question we should all be asking is, If OpenWRT can be so much better, then why is the commercial stuff *not* better?

      Step 1, find out what runs on your router (at wikidevi or similar) step 2, download the firmware image (there are even multiple forums with helpful folks to ask if you arent 100% sure) step 3, flash it the same way you would a normal firmware update, step 4 change the default password, and enjoy your new LAN! The only excuse is not knowing... there is no actual technical knowledge required, just basic keyboard/mouse skills, and reading comprehension.

    17. Re:Or you could just you know... by jeffmeden · · Score: 0

      I have thrown away 4 or 5 routers in the past 2 years (and gotten a nice service call fee for doing so) thanks to guys like you saying that shit only for OpenWRT to totally brick the router...thanks, keep up the good work!

      Anyone who can't spend 5 minutes on a forum finding out what will/wont work on their router deserves to part with their money, so, enjoy your work! As for me, I have reflashed at least a dozen different embedded devices (with OpenWRT and other open packages) with 0 bricks. Cheers!

    18. Re:Or you could just you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what good is custom firmware running on a system where the microcode is compromised, other than creating a false sense of security?

    19. Re:Or you could just you know... by Tim+the+Gecko · · Score: 1

      ipv6 (which no consumer ISP is supporting, not even comcast who was running trials)

      As of December last year, more than 25% of Comcast customers can get native dual stack broadband - see http://www.comcast6.net/

    20. Re:Or you could just you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not that trivial(but also not all that complex either), but seriously?! HTH does this shit keep making it to /. at all, let alone the front page?

    21. Re:Or you could just you know... by Linsaran · · Score: 2

      OpenWRT is so fucking easy to install and configure (easier than some consumer out-of-the-box experiences, even) that there really is no excuse if you expect a secure local network.

      No. It's not. To you, or the typical computer tech-savvy /. reader, maybe; but we're not average consumers. My father-in-law is well above average in that he bought a Linksys router rather than depend on the FIOS installed default, and he actually changed the password, but he's not going to reflash it any more than I'm going to rebore my car engine's cylinders with a hand drill. And the various older neighbors who I assist with network stuff, who think the Internet is broken if a web site changes its format, would have no clue whatever.

      The REAL question we should all be asking is, If OpenWRT can be so much better, then why is the commercial stuff *not* better?

      Step 1, find out what runs on your router (at wikidevi or similar) step 2, download the firmware image (there are even multiple forums with helpful folks to ask if you arent 100% sure) step 3, flash it the same way you would a normal firmware update, step 4 change the default password, and enjoy your new LAN! The only excuse is not knowing... there is no actual technical knowledge required, just basic keyboard/mouse skills, and reading comprehension.

      Step 1, presumes that people are aware there are alternative firmwares for their router, which most non-technical people would not realize, if they even know what a firmware is in the first place.

      Step 2, presumes that people can navigate a forum, or possibly multiple forums to find the link to a file that they're looking for. Considering how many people must click on those stupid 'download now' ads that end up on half the file managers out there, and end up with some spyware laden crap on their machine when they were looking for a driver or some nonsense, I don't trust non-technically inclined people to figure that out either.

      Step 3, presumes they know how to do a normal firmware update, again non-technical people might not even know what firmware is.

      Step 4, most non-technical people have less issue with whether something is secure, and more issue with whether something works. The reason so many people use dumb ass passwords like 'password1' is because they're easy for them to remember. They either don't realize that password1 is a bad password, or they don't care as long as it's easy for them to remember.

      TL;DR people want stuff that works, and doesn't require they reinvent the wheel to make it work. In their mind a commercial router should work out of the box, without needing to do open heart surgery on it.

      --
      In a bit of shameless internet panhandling, I accept Litecoin Donations at Lbd2oH9QsthD1GfuUXPyka12YxvWJYnBVf
    22. Re:Or you could just you know... by jrumney · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The issue is when there are exploitable bugs found and the device cannot/won't be updated.

      And how do you predict when that would be?

      Does it help at all when I design my embedded device self destruct on 14 May 2019, if the next Heartbleed type bug affecting it is found tomorrow?

      Are my customers going to come back and buy from me again if it is still rock solid with no known bugs on the day I choose for it to expire, and word quickly gets around that everyone's device was preprogrammed to die on that day?

    23. Re:Or you could just you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does it require a step beyond "plug it in"?

      If so it's too complicated for consumer grade systems.

    24. Re:Or you could just you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My poor "not connected to the internet" SmartTV. :(

    25. Re:Or you could just you know... by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      but I for one would be pissed to hell if I came home one day and my smart TV refused to turn on because it had gone 12 months with no updates. Like most things, the expectations of performance and security differ in every application, so no single rule will ever solve this.

      Maybe the problem is in consumers' expectations of performance vs their (generally false) assumption of security.
      Security can be trained, just like anything else. But, better than anything else, if it can be enforced by the device, we don't have to rely on people who couldn't be bothered to look both ways before crossing the street.

      At some point there's going to have to be inconvenience if everything in your life is wired to the internet and you want it actually secure.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    26. Re:Or you could just you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >And how do you predict when that would be?

      Any reasonable product planning includes an end of life date.

      >Are my customers going to come back and buy from me again if it is still rock solid with no known bugs on the day I choose for it to expire, and word quickly gets around that everyone's device was preprogrammed to die on that day?

      Since that's the way most products work, yes. (Duh.)

    27. Re:Or you could just you know... by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      Why weren't you running Openwrt?

      I don't know about him, but in my case, I happen to like having 5GHz 802.11ac with beamforming. The last time I checked, every open firmware in existence for the AC68U has broken support for 5GHz 802.11ac and its advanced radio features.

    28. Re:Or you could just you know... by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      Does it help at all when I design my embedded device self destruct on 14 May 2019, if the next Heartbleed type bug affecting it is found tomorrow?

      Yes.
      This story was on /. only last week
      http://it.slashdot.org/story/14/05/09/1240238/one-month-later-300000-servers-remain-vulnerable-to-heartbleed

      At least a self destruct would give us a firm date for when all the affected devices will be off the internet.
      Otherwise there will be people using affected hardware/software until the electrolytes leak out of the capacitors.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    29. Re:Or you could just you know... by AdamHaun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      OpenWRT is so fucking easy to install and configure (easier than some consumer out-of-the-box experiences, even) that there really is no excuse if you expect a secure local network ... there is no actual technical knowledge required, just basic keyboard/mouse skills, and reading comprehension.

      I think you're *wildly* overestimating the skill and confidence of the average home network user and the quality of open source project web sites. Let me walk you through the hidden minefield in your instructions. I'll use a Linksys WRT150N for reference.

      The real Step 1 is "realize that I'm supposed to install OpenWrt, and understand what that means". Most users have little to no idea of how the router actually works, so the idea of upgrading the firmware is not an obvious one.

      But let's say someone tells them to do it. They go to the OpenWrt web site. The second sentence under "What is OpenWrt?" is "Instead of trying to create a single, static firmware, OpenWrt provides a fully writable filesystem with package management.". Many users will be too terrified to proceed beyond this point. But let's say they make it to the Table of Hardware, and skip past the text about developer snapshots and hardware VLANs and the note from 2009 saying that the page might not be up to date. (That's not realistic -- many users expect to read sequentially.) Instead of a column that says "yes, this router is supported", there's a column named "Status" that gives the first OpenWrt version that supports the router. Next to that there's a column named "Version" that is undefined. I'm assuming it's the router version, but many users could get confused. But the important column is the "Target" column, which lists the specific OpenWrt platform that users should (but probably won't) remember for later. There are two targets for the WRT150N and no indication of which to choose. One of them no longer exists in the current version.

      Clicking on the model number in the table gives me an unorganized series of notes from various users. One of them, "An account of flashing OpenWrt to a WRT150N", sounds sort of like installation instructions, but is too brief and technical to be of any use. It does have a working download link, but it's to a version that's five years old. The one after that suggests that one target option (the nonexistent one) is better than the other. None of this is in clear newbie-friendly language and it's all after pages of Linux log dumps. If they land on this page, most users will probably click the back button as fast as they can.

      Alternately, we could do it your way:

      Step 1, find out what runs on your router (at wikidevi or similar)

      That's somewhat better, but they still have to read through a dense, abbreviation-heavy table of technical specs. (That's after they figure out they need to search for their router's model number and not "Linksys".) At least there's a simple indication that OpenWrt supports the router. But how would they know to go to WikiDevi? I hadn't even heard of it before today. And most importantly, how would they figure out which target to use, or even that targets exist?

      step 2, download the firmware image

      Now we're in for some fun! There's a download link at the top of the OpenWrt site. Clicking on it gives me a directory listing. None of the directory names look like they contain software to download, even to me. On the right side of the OpenWrt main page there's another download link for the latest release. This gives another directory listing. (Apparently the correct directory is /attitude_adjustment/12.09.) Now there's a list of subdirectories that look (to me) like p

      --
      Visit the
    30. Re:Or you could just you know... by jeffmeden · · Score: 0

      Reading comprehension... Is a hell of a drug.

      The basic premise of this discussion was users who are expecting security (face it, if you are clueless you won't give a shit if your linksys router is compromised or not and will live life in bliss) so yes, there is a (really low) bar for the expectation of the user in this premise.

    31. Re:Or you could just you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure about that user's particular reasons, but to my knowledge, there is no open firmware I can put on my Linksys router unless I am willing to give up wireless-N and live with only wireless-G speeds.

    32. Re:Or you could just you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because a RTU speaking DNP3 controlling a power relay isn't equivalent to a WAP.

      However, that doesn't mean it should be replaced, at least not until the systems it communcates with don't speak (only) DNP3.

      And then there are the systems that run a mix, DNP3, Modbus, 60870, Quantel, etc. If they could, they would love to just standardize on one protocol; however, it is not nearly as easy as it sounds. These transitions need to be planned and carried out, with fully tested replacements operational (in-place) prior to the cutover. It can be done, but even a seemingly simple replacement of equipment can take three months due to the planning alone. This isn't replacing a coffee maker with a timer, as you can't allow the service be interrupted indefinately, and in many cases you can't allow interruption at all.

      This joker will never get what he wants. The embedded systems he needs to deactivate have already been deployed. He's suggesting deploying new ones that if are not "correctly configured" will deactivate. The code in embedded systems are designed to keep running. I've seen PIC code that upon state transition failure eventually converges to a running system (self-stabilization). The industry built that because _it was wanted_. Now this guy wants systems to just "turn themselves off"?!?! He really doesn't understand his market. He should be advocating systems that cannot be deployed operationally in an insecure manner.

    33. Re:Or you could just you know... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I think if a product "dies" before it wears out, the customers will be highly annoyed. Customers generally do not want planned obsolescence forced on them. They don't want the Windows XP model where something that is perfectly functioning is made obsolete in an effort to drive sales. They'd rather buy the car than lease it.

      Products can be upgraded over time though, they don't have to be stuck with the same firmware they shipped with forever.

      And don't forget the vast number of embedded devices which are never networked to anything else, and thus can't be considered security holes. Such as your microwave oven, television remote control, sprinkler system control, etc. There may be newer varieties of those products but that's irrelevant if the customer does not want to upgrade.

    34. Re:Or you could just you know... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Oh come on, it is most definitely not easy to install, and even less easy to configure. If your grandma can do this then you have a very special grandma rather than an average one.

      First thing to do with OpenWRT is spend time searching databases to figure out whether or not OpenWRT will even run on your device. Second step is to notice that your device has a "*" next to it which leads to a footnote indicating that special caveats apply, such as looking up what revision number of the device you have (the number that is never on the box). Then you follow a special set of instructions for your particular device which come with a preface that warns about potentially bricking your system because you have only the 2MB hardware version so follow all steps precisely to the letter and do not attempt to install the pre-built easy packages.

    35. Re:Or you could just you know... by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      Step 0. I'm running Tomato, because (like the typical /. reader) I have an effing clue.

  2. Dan Geer, the CISO of In-Q-Tel, by wiredog · · Score: 5, Informative

    In-Q-Tel

    The IQT Mission

    We identify, adapt, and deliver innovative technology solutions to support the missions of the Central Intelligence Agency and broader U.S. Intelligence Community.

    1. Re:Dan Geer, the CISO of In-Q-Tel, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hmm, so he sells hardware and he is in the business of providing info to an organization which remotely hacks hardware.. and thinks we should force end-of-life on hardware and force everything to be remotely accessible.. I see no problems here.

    2. Re:Dan Geer, the CISO of In-Q-Tel, by cusco · · Score: 2

      OK, this makes more sense. Only true morons of that caliber could imagine that ripping and replacing the control system for a power dam, the guts of a multimillion dollar CNC mill, or the access control system for an entire enterprise every few years was a good thing. Know how long it takes to update the embedded firmware on a reader board over RS-485? Fifteen to forty five minutes. Each door. I've worked in enterprises with as many as 21000 reader panels.

      Not just "NO", but "NO FUCKING WAY, NO!"

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    3. Re:Dan Geer, the CISO of In-Q-Tel, by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

      Agreed, and even where a replacement would be easy, I think we have too much planned obsolescence already. Not all users will be computer-savvy enough to understand how to update their systems. This proposal would cause unnecessary costs and waste.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
  3. No thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    What the guy is saying is all devices must be connected 24/7 or they will be removed from use. Since removal from use is obviously undesireable in the long run, his message is all devices must be connected all the time (possibly to "trusted" remote points managed by In-Q-Tel's masters - you know who you are).

    What is this guy's definition of "remote"? Can I manage my embedded devices from my own servers? Is that not remote enough?

    Does it have to be a "cloud" setup hosted somewhere deep in Utah with a bunch of Booz Allen people managing it?

    Looking forward to remotely activated microphones in my washing machine and toaster, to improve the user experience.

    1. Re:No thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      What the guy is saying is all devices must be connected 24/7 or they will be removed from use. Since removal from use is obviously undesireable in the long run, his message is all devices must be connected all the time (possibly to "trusted" remote points managed by In-Q-Tel's masters - you know who you are).

      What is this guy's definition of "remote"? Can I manage my embedded devices from my own servers? Is that not remote enough?

      Does it have to be a "cloud" setup hosted somewhere deep in Utah with a bunch of Booz Allen people managing it?

      Looking forward to remotely activated microphones in my washing machine and toaster, to improve the user experience.

      You jest but I seriously think that the NSA is getting away with a lot of things right now, the latest generation proves that they simply cannot live without some form of cellphone on them at all times, now we are apparently being suckered into having mics and webcams in TVs to improve user experience (wait what?) apparently it's all about gestures. (What retard wants to wave at their TV? in all seriousness?) the remote is still the best way to interact with said TV.

      And then we have HDMI networking interfaces coupled with on-demand TV, and suddenly the TV can actively spy on you for the NSA or other body.

      1984 is here albeit 30 years late.. (thanks to a gullible population)

    2. Re:No thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bingo. What is with this IoT push. All it does is expand the current problems we have.

      Security 101: If worried about it, don't hook it up to the Net. It is sad reading about these marketdroids demanding that their stuff have Net access or disable themselves. Not everyone wants/needs their SCADA stuff online.

      Yes, Stuxnet vectors are possible, but they have been since the beginning of time. Air-gapping means that an attacker has to get a physical presence in order to do harm, and not just hack from some hut in the swamp in Elbonia.

    3. Re:No thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looking forward to remotely activated microphones in my washing machine and toaster, to improve the user experience.

      What better way to connect you promptly to the call center in southeast asia, than to detect vocal patterns like "god fucking damned burned toast again!!!!!"

  4. Terrible idea by mirix · · Score: 4, Informative

    You'll have to install custom firmware to prevent things from having to go to the dump on their third birthday?

    Seems pretty ridiculous, not to mention that it can still have a hole exploited on the day they launch the device, and not be updated for years (in it's allotted lifespan).

    I'm more for the option of make things easier to update, and, the important part... actually release bloody updates! I'm looking at you, almost every embedded device manufacturer out there.

    --
    Sent from my PDP-11
    1. Re:Terrible idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they started shipping all their routers with the password set to match the serial number with an SSH style lockout after X amount of failed attempts, TheMoon wouldn't work.

      Also disable remote administration by default as well as WPA2 by default for WiFi

    2. Re:Terrible idea by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      This is why I will never buy an Android phone again. The lack of guaranteed updates is a huge problem. I have a hen which has decent hardware, but the software is stuck in the past. Apple and even Windows phones do a much better job at being kept up to date.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    3. Re:Terrible idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy shit so many issues popup with embeded devices. Updates should be some what mandatory.

    4. Re:Terrible idea by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

      Try a Nexus, droid vendors tend to only update current far sale hardware and that changes every 6-12 months.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    5. Re:Terrible idea by dbIII · · Score: 2

      I have a hen which has decent hardware, but the software is stuck in the past.

      Eggsactly.

    6. Re:Terrible idea by Simulant · · Score: 1

      Even Nexus is only good for a few years.... I'm holding my breath for another year of N4 updates.

    7. Re:Terrible idea by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Never a good solution.

      Techs who have been around before the year 2000 tend to have this policy. Upgrade only after it has been proven. This is a lesson they have learned because especially during the late 90's. Patches and Upgrades, didn't go in smoothly and often caused more problems then they fixed.
      Today patching and upgrades tend to go in far more smoothly, however we still want to be sure that it is proven to work before we are the first to jump in.

      Now this means our systems are also more vulnerable for a longer time, and may need to have a secondary means to protect yourself from the system.
       

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    8. Re:Terrible idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought so too and selected Nexus 5, but since purchase on January, it has got only one system update and that happened on the first day I used the phone. It seems that Google cares about bugs on already sold devices as much as anybody else in the industry.

    9. Re:Terrible idea by wolrahnaes · · Score: 2

      I thought so too and selected Nexus 5, but since purchase on January, it has got only one system update and that happened on the first day I used the phone. It seems that Google cares about bugs on already sold devices as much as anybody else in the industry.

      Android itself has not seen an update since then. The Nexus 5 initially shipped with 4.4.0 and got both 4.4.1 and 4.4.2 as soon as they were publicly announced. When Android 4.4.3 comes out (apparently soon) you're basically guaranteed to be the first device for which it's available.

      Compare this to all the other phone vendors, who at least in the case of the large ones you know have had access to 4.4.3 for some time, where most devices still aren't on 4.4.2. Where devices are still being *launched* brand new and out of date the moment they're available.

      --
      I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
    10. Re:Terrible idea by funwithBSD · · Score: 1

      Like androids in Bladerunner...

      I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.

      --
      Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
    11. Re:Terrible idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why I will never buy an Android phone again. The lack of guaranteed updates is a huge problem. I have a hen which has decent hardware, but the software is stuck in the past. Apple and even Windows phones do a much better job at being kept up to date.

      I was pleasantly surprised to see a number of vendors planning on a 4.4 update, even to handsets that were (gasp) released over 2 years ago. The tide is slowly changing in the market, vendors are seeing value in churning out code to keep customers loyal. And to that end you have got to be fucking kidding me with Windows Phone. I don't care that the OS got an "update", if it can't run half the apps what goddamn good is it? I use both regularly (work shackles me with a Nokia piece of shit) and Android is so fucking far ahead of Windows Phone in terms of software maintenance and usability that it's not even worth comparing.

    12. Re:Terrible idea by cusco · · Score: 1

      Windows NT 3.51 Service Pack 3. 'Nuff said.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    13. Re:Terrible idea by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Forced obsolescence is NOT the answer.

    14. Re:Terrible idea by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      > This is why I will never buy an Android phone again. The lack of guaranteed updates is a huge problem.

      Is Apple really any better though?

      Try getting iOS updates to the original iPad. Mine is stuck on iOS5. :-(

      I'm using iOS6 on iPhone 5 but I don't see any other vendor doing a better job of support. Apple isn't interested in fixing bugs in iOS6.

    15. Re:Terrible idea by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      > Techs who have been around before the year 2000 tend to have this policy.

      Exactly: Don't fix what isn't broken.

    16. Re:Terrible idea by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      And I have three iPod Touches for which no software updates will ever again be forthcoming.

      You never bought an Android phone before, let alone 'again.' Your boss at Apple would fire you if you did.

    17. Re:Terrible idea by tepples · · Score: 1

      A fourth-generation iPod touch purchased the day before Apple started selling the fifth-generation iPod touch stopped getting substantial updates in less than a year. That's when Apple introduced iOS 7, and the iPT4 didn't have enough RAM to run it.

    18. Re:Terrible idea by hawk · · Score: 1

      > I have a hen which has decent hardware, but the software is stuck in the past.

      So?

      You thought roosters don't get ED? :)

      hawk

    19. Re:Terrible idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eggsellent!

  5. How to sound deep by kruach+aum · · Score: 2

    Imply the opposite of what is expected, without regard for reality, truth or common sense. Ex:

    "'Is all the technologic dependency, and the data that fuels it, making us more resilient or more fragile?"

    Look at this amazing thinker. Didn't he just blow your fucking mind?

    1. Re:How to sound deep by roninmagus · · Score: 2

      There's also what I refer to as the "lone voice in the wilderness" effect. Whereby, whatever the issue, if someone simply states that they have an "inexpressible doubt" in something then they will seem to be the smartest person in the room. This is used quite often in political debates. It's also quite effective for opening up "I told you so" options later, when they never really told anyone anything.

    2. Re:How to sound deep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they're so smart, why can't the express their doubt?

    3. Re:How to sound deep by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Look at this amazing thinker. Didn't he just blow your fucking mind?

      If he were a Slashdot poster, his every post would be modded up through the roof.

  6. Wrong thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about just not connect those systems on internet in first place? Seriously this is not hardware issue but people issue. Some idiot some where wants to be lazy and docent take time to properly secure systems..

  7. my thermostat by spectrokid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    My thermostat will never be connected to anything and does not need an end of life thank you very much. And I want to see the manager who will approve buying this kind of stuff.

    --

    10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then

    1. Re:my thermostat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Talk to any one in the :
      - Shoe industry
      - Car part industry
      - Clothing industry
      - etc

      Merchandise from these are all designed to fail. It creates more repeat business. Check out the movie "Kinky Boots" as it touches on this subject.

    2. Re:my thermostat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People said that about their RTU in the field, too.

      But they are being networked, and anything that gets networked also gets reported. The hunger for big data is insatiable.

    3. Re:my thermostat by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      However the quality manufacturers of those products do make them so thast they last a long time. That is the difference between the bargain brands and the quality crafted products (and since Windows is designed to fail, I consider it a bargain brand).

    4. Re:my thermostat by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      "My thermostat will never be connected to anything and does not need an end of life thank you very much."

      I can see the advantage there, but wouldn't it be more useful if you connected it to the solenoid or what have you so it could control the temperature in the house?

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  8. Planned obsolescence by Melkman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What could possibly go wrong ? A PLC controlling a plant stopping at some random date is perfectly acceptable, right. I'm sure manufacturers will love this. A guaranteed replacement market is a wet dream for any market.

    1. Re:Planned obsolescence by Vlad_the_Inhaler · · Score: 2

      I think *that* is the main point of this idea, security is just a way of selling it.

      --
      Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
    2. Re:Planned obsolescence by inasity_rules · · Score: 1

      A lot. You can't do that with a PLC as that would be clinically insane and might have serious safety/economic ramifications. No engineer worth his salt would touch such a device. You might configure it to simply fail to startup after a powerdown on a certain date, but not have it stop while the system is running.

      --
      I have determined that my sig is indeterminate.
    3. Re:Planned obsolescence by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      You might configure it to simply fail to startup after a powerdown on a certain date, but not have it stop while the system is running.

      Interesting thought which breaks down when you consider that many such devices are power down only when they reach end of life and need replacing. Anyway the commercial impact is still ludicrous. Go stand in front of management and tell them we are losing $1000000 per day because the power outage triggered an and of life time bomb in the control system and the vendor needs 6 weeks to ship a new one.

      The entire premisepremise is retarded, protesting things should artificially due because a vendor refuses to provide security fixes.

    4. Re:Planned obsolescence by cusco · · Score: 1

      A manufacturer who implements this will see his customer base abandon him in droves and will be reduced to only doing work for the consumer market. I have worked on access control systems that have been in place for well over 20 years, I would never install one that we knew would fail after 3.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    5. Re:Planned obsolescence by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      What could possibly go wrong ? A PLC controlling a plant stopping at some random date is perfectly acceptable, right. I'm sure manufacturers will love this. A guaranteed replacement market is a wet dream for any market.

      Obsolescence is already planned for every single product, no matter what, period. If done properly (imho) then a guarateed fail-by date would cause the realization that the true cost of ownership per year for a system would include the cost of scrapping it when it's too old to work right. Today, what happens is a system is bought because it fit in the budget this year, and it's held on to for as long as possible, long after security and failure risk have climbed way way up past an acceptable point, because "it still works, don't it?" This "let me keep it as long as I want" mentality is exactly what causes many poor decisions and big big problems. If a part in a plant isn't being tracked right down to the date/time of manufacture, of installation (and who installed it and what software it had) then you are already Doing It Wrong. A rolling plan of "here are 10 cards we need to replace this month" is perfectly workable in any modern operation. If not, you deserve for your plant to shut down sooner rather than later.

    6. Re:Planned obsolescence by inasity_rules · · Score: 1

      I would agree, though I have had a number of long running plants I have sat in front of that were offline for weeks because they were "broken", and investigation showed that the operator had simply forgotten how to look for and clear a startup error....

      It is ridiculous in any case, and I don't think it is a good idea. The trouble is, in a long running plant, they will never apply any "security fix" because that means shutting down the system anyway. Possibly even re-commissioning and testing the damn thing anyway, depending on policy. This is why most of the time people go with air gaps and such. Not always possible, but it is a bit of a tricky problem.

      --
      I have determined that my sig is indeterminate.
    7. Re:Planned obsolescence by afidel · · Score: 1

      Hell, $1M per day is nothing, when the major auto companies are selling a certain line of cars as fast as they can make them downtime is in the multiple millions per hour range, and with a steel plant a cold shutdown can result in hundreds of millions in damage.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    8. Re:Planned obsolescence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's do the same thing for buildings. After all, buildings eventually fall down and collapse all on their own, or they have holes in them or burglars discover how to sneak into them. So we need to have an absolute end of life for each building that is built where on a certain date the building will collapse into a nice neat little pile ready to be hauled away and replaced by a new building which will be safe from burglars and all other potential evils. Since we can't know how fast burglars will invent new ways of breaking into buildings, we will need to set the auto-collapse function to a relatively short time frame of 20 years. Just long enough so that the records of when the building will collapse get mislaid and they forget to warn the people to get out of the building. Oh, and all of those 100 year old, 500 year old, 1000 year old and 2000 year old buildings around the world that are still being used - we need to go tear them down immediately to replace them with 20 year auto-collapsing buildings, because, obviously, the most important thing is to prevent people from getting burgled. Anybody who doesn't have a rolling plan of "here are the 10 buildings we need to replace this month" is already "Doing it Wrong".

    9. Re:Planned obsolescence by ThatsDrDangerToYou · · Score: 1

      Yay, it's like Y2K every day!

    10. Re:Planned obsolescence by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      And humans too. Do away with expensive and traumatic end of life care, just have them all shot when they turn 70 (side benefit of fixing social security). Five years of retirement should be enough for everyone. Meanwhile we get to tell children that because they turned 10 that all their toys have stopped working, which is ok because the younger brother wants all new toys anyway.

    11. Re:Planned obsolescence by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      It is ridiculous in any case, and I don't think it is a good idea. The trouble is, in a long running plant, they will never apply any "security fix" because that means shutting down the system anyway. Possibly even re-commissioning and testing the damn thing anyway, depending on policy. This is why most of the time people go with air gaps and such. Not always possible, but it is a bit of a tricky problem.

      That is also not guaranteed. Many modern systems allow on the fly firmware upgrades. It's only when you have to upgrade the physical hardware that an outage is required. Though admittedly that is a very recent trend. In most systems out there a firmware upgrade still requires a full shutdown, however recommissioning activities which you mentioned are the real bottleneck are avoided in such scenarios.

    12. Re:Planned obsolescence by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I reject the idea that the poor struggling car industry is making several million an hour at each plant. Turnover maybe, lost profits not.

      Also the cold shutdown would happen regardless in the scenario mentioned above. It's not pretty. I've seen a glass manufacturer who had to dismantle most of their gear because the glass went hard in the tubes. It wasn't a pretty sight.

    13. Re:Planned obsolescence by afidel · · Score: 1

      Ford made $35,900 million in sales in Q1 of 2014, they have 34 assembly plants. 34 plants * 90 days * 24 hours = 73,440 hours, so "only" $0.5M per hour, but that assumes that all hours are the same, they are not and like I said when they are selling all they can of a model it easily runs into the several million per hour.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    14. Re:Planned obsolescence by inasity_rules · · Score: 1

      On the fly firmware updates don't always allow for proper testing. I don't know anyone who would trust an on the fly update on any large system.

      --
      I have determined that my sig is indeterminate.
    15. Re:Planned obsolescence by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      You should trust it in many cases. About the only systems that you can firmware upgrade on the run are multi-processor systems which rely heavily on dual+ redundancy to apply a firmware update while the remainder of the system remains online. These same systems will compare the running results of both processors and won't re-sync, re-educate, re-marry, re-insert-fancy-vendor's-term-here. I've seen this happen many times on a variety of systems we've firmware updated on the run. The answer is usually the little green light doesn't come on and you call the vendor in to explain why and downgrade the firmware, or the processor ends in a reboot loop. I've never actually seen a process have an unexpected output as a result of a failed on the run firmware update, though this in no way means it can't happen. It's always a risk.

      The only time we weren't able to do an easy firmware upgrade we still managed to do so online, though we had to take quite a lot of care in bypassing / manually taking control. That was an expensive exercise and we had 6 operators running around holding the plant in a steady state while the controller was out of action, but we brought it back online and then tested it online.

      No one is suggesting blind trust, but there are many systems which have documented and proven ways of doing firmware updates on the fly.

    16. Re:Planned obsolescence by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      So you are talking about turnover and not profit. The two are very different things. It doesn't cost Ford $0.5million / hour for the plant to be down as their variable costs plummet when production does.

    17. Re:Planned obsolescence by inasity_rules · · Score: 1

      Out of curiosity, what PLC system allows this? I haven't run into any that do so far, though I tend to avoid certain manufacturers when I can....

      --
      I have determined that my sig is indeterminate.
    18. Re:Planned obsolescence by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      PLCs can mean a few different things to people so I limo them with all control systems. We have some Schneider PLC here that allows online firmware update one CPU at a time. The latest Triconex safety system does too, apparently Honeywell Experion does from what I've heard but no experience there, Foxboro systems do on the main controllers only, I don't think IO can be done without taking those channels briefly offline. Emerson said it's on the agenda for them too for DeltaV.

      Some systems will hold output for a firmware update. The CCC Series 3+ for instance can be firmware upgrade with great precaution though we only did that when it really was out last option (upgrade on another piece of equipment caused compatibility issues that we only detected after startup).

      A lot of this is very recent but the industry is definitely moving towards it. They've started realizing the wider tend. Reliability is pushing turnarounds or to ever decreasing frequencies and downtime is not tolerated for maintenance which fits heavily into buying decisions. I mean we are looking at an 8 year running cycle on one of our units meaning our new safety PLC will be obsolete before it's first maintenance shutdown.

    19. Re:Planned obsolescence by inasity_rules · · Score: 1

      That is actually quite interesting thanks. I'll look into some of those, though I am often limited by what the client specifies.

      --
      I have determined that my sig is indeterminate.
  9. Here's a better idea by msobkow · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Here's a better idea. Charge anyone who ships unpatchable and unpatched hardware with sponsoring terrorism, because it's their laziness causing the problem.

    Why the hell should I be forced to buy, buy, and rebuy the same god damned hardware over and over to save them from patching their shitty systems that they sell?

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:Here's a better idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why the hell should I be forced to buy, buy, and rebuy the same god damned hardware over and over to save them from patching their shitty systems that they sell?

      Because capitalism.

    2. Re:Here's a better idea by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      Or to put it another way, why the hell should I, as a manufacturer, be forced to pay, pay, and pay again for people to make updates for a cheap piece of hardware that barely covered its own cost in the first place?

      If you want eternal support, you should buy from a vendor that offers eternal support at a suitably expensive price. If there isn't such a vendor, you should re-engineer your solution to include only components that have such support, or build those parts yourself.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    3. Re:Here's a better idea by Nimey · · Score: 1

      To be devil's advocate (I don't necessarily agree with the author's proposition, though I can see how he got there), your business model of making cheap crap doesn't deserve protection; either adapt and make more expensive, maintainable stuff or die.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    4. Re:Here's a better idea by cusco · · Score: 1

      you should buy from a vendor that offers eternal support at a suitably expensive price.

      We will. Enjoy your descent into the hell of the consumer market because commercial and industrial customers will abandon you immediately.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    5. Re:Here's a better idea by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      Or to put it another way, why the hell should I, as a manufacturer, be forced to pay, pay, and pay again for people to make updates for a cheap piece of hardware that barely covered its own cost in the first place?

      If you want eternal support, you should buy from a vendor that offers eternal support at a suitably expensive price. If there isn't such a vendor, you should re-engineer your solution to include only components that have such support, or build those parts yourself.

      You are presuming that humans are any good at all at assessing the risk of something as nuanced as purchasing something with no (meaningful) support. Does it work when I install it? No, ok take it back and get a new one. Yes, ok great leave it there until it stops working. Wait, there are two versions I can buy, they both do the exact same thing, but this one is twice as much because it comes with a 3 year service warranty? Fuck that I won't need it 3 years from now anyway, that is someone elses problem.

    6. Re:Here's a better idea by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Maybe if you didn't demand a $20 wireless router you could expect better firmware quality and regular updates. Otherwise you have to accept that it will probably only last months before either the hardware fails or someone discovers a way to exploit it.

      I'm all for requiring vendors to patch, just don't expect equipment to be cheap any more.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:Here's a better idea by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      You have the answer. Forced liability on software companies.

      Company hacked because of a Windows flaw? Microsoft owes you the $22 trillion it cost for cleaning up the hack... Yes, use the over inflated numbers they claim.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    8. Re:Here's a better idea by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      Who said anything about "protection?"

      If I, as a manufacturer, want to make cheap parts with a limited support life, and you, a a consumer, want to buy them precisely because they are within your budget and fit your stated needs, then what exactly is the problem that we require protection from?

      If you can't manage your own risk analysis to determine that you need (and therefore should pay for) eternal updates, that's not my problem.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    9. Re:Here's a better idea by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      I'm actually fully aware that humans are terrible at assessing risk. It's obvious whenever someone complains about the price of milspec parts, which are expected to function perfectly for a very long time.

      My point is that it's just not reasonable to dump the cost of eternal support onto the manufacturers, out of some perverse sense of entitlement granting you free fixes forever. There are vendors out there that offer the very-long-term support packages, but they charge for it. The $25 you paid for a router just won't sustain a business if it's expected to eat the cost of eternal support.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    10. Re:Here's a better idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >You have the answer. Forced liability on software companies.

      Go for it. Software prices go up by 100x and Linus, Theo, and everyone else providing free software rots in debtor's prisons for eternity.

      (Oh you think only software companies will get saddled with liability? Good luck with that, sucka.)

    11. Re:Here's a better idea by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      That sounds good. Now, it completely shuts down any 'free alternative' software, because there's no large organization to indemnify them. So we have Solaris, Windows, MacOS. All priced about four times as much as they are at present. All other OSes are shut down and any disbursal point that tries to distribute them is hammered with litigants.

      Rosy future, eh?

    12. Re:Here's a better idea by Nethead · · Score: 1

      You just gave every lawyer a giant woody, even the ladies.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    13. Re:Here's a better idea by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      as a manufacturer, be forced to pay, pay, and pay again for people to make updates for a cheap piece of hardware that barely covered its own cost in the first place?

      You aren't. When you get bored with supporting old kit, simply open source the code, and let the community support it! That is what the BSD licence is for!

      Not opensourcing EOL code is what Gitmo is for!

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    14. Re:Here's a better idea by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      So of the (relatively) few people who bought my product, fewer are embedded programmers, and fewer still would be interested in making community updates, and even fewer of those would be likely to release the updates to others - and there's no guarantee as to the quality of those updates. From a security perspective, your EOL device is now far more open to targeted attacks, and you're just plain out of luck unless you install "Abednego Breakinski's Uberpatch 57 (w/ awesomesauce mod)". Sounds like a great improvement.

      From a manufacturer's perspective, that would also mean open-sourcing the foundation for current versions of my products, giving my trade secrets away to my competitors. Especially under the BSD license, they'd be free to incorporate my optimized implementations and my secret algorithms into their own products, making not-quite-compatible knockoffs.to dilute my brand.

      It's a lose-lose situation.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    15. Re:Here's a better idea by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      No it doesnt. Forced liability on software that is SOLD commercially. Free open source software is allowed a disclamer as you have the ability to find the problems and fix them yourself. Closed software is the only software that has forced liability as you can not fix it yourself.

      Very easy to do, very clear language. and it will force two things. Either software companies will have to release their source code on request to anyone that asks to avoid the liability, or they have to actually write secure and good code.

      And yes secure and good code is possible, I dont see many military or aircraft systems that have major fatal failures because the industry has a liability attached to their software. if they kill someone because of a bug, the families can go after the company.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  10. Absolutely not by Ceriel+Nosforit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    These are not consumer items. Industrial systems seldom live just one life, and after being decommissioned they usually go up for action to be recommissioned somewhere else. If you artificially disrupt this dynamic you cause enormous economic loss, and for what? To perpetuate a buzzword?

    The entire proposal is barking up the wrong tree.

    It is however a moderately interesting insight into the echo-chamber of national intelligence. Rather funny to see how Mr. Geer talks about monocultures while laying on their own lore _thick_.

    --
    All rites reversed 2010
    1. Re:Absolutely not by Wizardess · · Score: 0

      Not just barking up the wrong tree but also just plain barking mad, absurd, off the wall, and possibly . . . . . a troll.

      {O.O}

    2. Re:Absolutely not by Ceriel+Nosforit · · Score: 1

      Any troll elaborate enough is indistinguishable from a valuable contribution. ;)

      His philosophy is geared for rhetoric alone, like the ancient Greek, and not for enlightened self-interest.

      --
      All rites reversed 2010
    3. Re:Absolutely not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is however a moderately interesting insight into the echo-chamber of national intelligence. Rather funny to see how Mr. Geer talks about monocultures while laying on their own lore _thick_.

      Well, suppose someone releases something for which no zero-day is ever found and no backdoor was put into it. People might be secure.

      It's like having a pre-Macrovision VCR or a pre-CALEA telephone network (I admit the latter is a little hard to fit in one's basement). If everything dies every five years, then everyone from MPAA to the intelligence community can guarantee that with every crank of the legislative ratchet, all the "latest and greatest" legally-mandated DRM/backdoors will eventually be forced onto the consumer/enterprise.

    4. Re:Absolutely not by Ceriel+Nosforit · · Score: 1

      People might be secure.

      The system might be secure. The people will not be.

      It's much easier to exploit humans than machines. The Russians did and probably still do HUMINT for this reason. US popular culture knows about Kevin Mitnick's social engineering, which is also HUMINT.

      Hence, 'echo chamber'. NATO-aligned countries are susceptible to this, but in the US the problem is like a techno-fetishism. It's been this way since the '50s.

      --
      All rites reversed 2010
  11. What about devices with no RTC? by pipedwho · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If a device does not have a way to keep track of time (eg. in built real time clock, with backup battery that will last for the duration of the device's 'lifetime'), then it becomes vulnerable to permanent denial of service when something spoofs a fake future date and time. What happens when a hundred thousand devices go offline because someone spoofed an NTP response?

    You may as well force every device to have a kill switch and remotely shut it down when it's too old. At least that'll probably require some kind of public key signature from an authenticated service (in the same way you'd authenticate a remote firmware update).

    What I'm trying to say is this is one of those 'management ideas' that sounds great in the philosophical sense, but fails in technical merit.

    1. Re:What about devices with no RTC? by caitriona81 · · Score: 1

      Simple enough. Skip the clock entirely, and let the battery itself be the "clock". The battery dies, and the device no longer operates. It's not particularly difficult to design a system with an embedded, non-rechargable battery that lasts for a specified lifespan. There may be some variability in that time, but you can get close enough this way to kill off neglected devices by a certian point.

    2. Re:What about devices with no RTC? by RDW · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Simple enough. Skip the clock entirely, and let the battery itself be the "clock". The battery dies, and the device no longer operates. It's not particularly difficult to design a system with an embedded, non-rechargable battery that lasts for a specified lifespan. There may be some variability in that time, but you can get close enough this way to kill off neglected devices by a certian point.

      Take out 'non-rechargeable' and this is pretty much Apple's business model.

    3. Re:What about devices with no RTC? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gaming industry has and uses suicide batteries.
      http://www.retroclinic.com/leopardcats/decrypt/decryption.htm

    4. Re:What about devices with no RTC? by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      If a device does not have a way to keep track of time (eg. in built real time clock, with backup battery that will last for the duration of the device's 'lifetime'), then it becomes vulnerable to permanent denial of service when something spoofs a fake future date and time. What happens when a hundred thousand devices go offline because someone spoofed an NTP response?

      You may as well force every device to have a kill switch and remotely shut it down when it's too old. At least that'll probably require some kind of public key signature from an authenticated service (in the same way you'd authenticate a remote firmware update).

      What I'm trying to say is this is one of those 'management ideas' that sounds great in the philosophical sense, but fails in technical merit.

      That's easy, let it count the hours it runs (as most devices already do) irrespective of time. After 3 years (or whatever) of operation, it stops or creates an annoying ass alarm buzz or something.

      And more to the point, you have probably hit on the real "solution" to the security issue, a remote kill switch. If a vulnerability gets in the wild, simply kill all the affected devices until they can be reflashed with a fixed version (and a new timer). That's what you want to have happen anyway, right? 10 million silenced PLCs instead of 10 million nodes of some new botnet, attacking and putting at risk the other 10 billion devices on the net.

    5. Re:What about devices with no RTC? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've already run into this, in my very low-tech house. Both my tenant's, and my CO detectors, started beeping, within the
      same 24 hours. Thinking we had a problem with one of the water heaters, furnaces, stoves, chimney blockage, etc...I quickly
      began checking all of these out....at 2:00 am. Finally read the fine print on the back of the detectors. They were designed to
      die after 7 years, and make a particular beeping sequence when they did. It WAS the correct sequence. We were, therefore,
      NOT going to die in our sleep. (Funny, when I bought them at home deport, I was not told I was buying something that would die
      in 7 years.). Back to...you guessed it, home depot. Choices: two new 7 year units, for cheaper, or two new 10 year units, more
      expensive. I went with the 7 year units, figuring that the added three years, and Moore's law, might give me some practical advantage,
      and save a few bucks today.
      Why do the batteries ALWAYS die at 2:00am, just after you've gone to sleep? Besides Murphy....?

  12. Sympathy, but no go by gnalre · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As someone who has to support legacy systems, there is nothing more I would like to see old embedded systems die (and in some cases, incinerated and the embers crushed into the ground).

    But we have to be realistic.

    The main effort in systems like SCADA is the commissioning time required. You cannot just rip out a system, plug in a new box and expect everything to work as before.

    Secondly who pays for this? The customer will not be happy if we say every 5 years we say you have to close your factory down for 2 weeks while we rip out all your old boxes and replace with new ones.

    Finally what is the guarantee that the new box has not introduced a new security hole?

    The real solution is the segmentation of the security and application code. Use Trusted boot technologies to verify the running code and ring fence the code with your security management application. Then if a new threat is introduced you only need to update the security app, leaving the hardware and application untouched.

    Unfortunately at present industrial application either have no security or are very closely coupled meaning that updates are difficult and costly.

    --
    Choose your allies carefully, it is highly unlikely you will be held accountable for the actions of your enemies
    1. Re:Sympathy, but no go by number17 · · Score: 1

      Secondly who pays for this? The customer will not be happy if we say every 5 years we say you have to close your factory down for 2 weeks while we rip out all your old boxes and replace with new ones.

      And that assumes that all your boxes perform the same function, were purchased at the same time, from the same manufacturer, and have the same end of life. Otherwise these things would be like individual light bulbs dieing out in an office tower. You would have to have somebody managing the lifetime of every device otherwise its reactionary.

    2. Re:Sympathy, but no go by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Some of these devices are very very expensive. You want 10 years of service out of them at least, withoug some government spy telling you that 5 years is good enough for everyone.

  13. Not so sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A guaranteed replacement market is a wet dream for any market.

    Seems like vedor lock in and constantly running support deals are a better deal. If the crappy pos requipment dies the next one purchased might be from your competitor who actually developed their product instead of sat on the castpiles. If the pos product instead only fails slighty you'll get endless support revenue. Bleed the sucker so dry he can't afford to replace the pos equipment.

  14. This is actually already a big problem by StephenBryant396 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There are a lot of cars, insurance telematics devices, security alarms, etc. sitting on mobile phone networks generating signaling and consuming radio resources. They were designed in the early days and largely not reachable. Simply terminating the credentials in the network doesn't help - it actually makes the problem worse because the firmware on the device is often quite aggressive and keeps trying to attach. This is something that has absorbed a lot of my time combating and there are efforts in standards bodies to address. This approach actually a pretty good idea IMO.

    1. Re:This is actually already a big problem by drainbramage · · Score: 1

      Are you the dude that got HP to put 'time out' chips in their print cartridges?

      --
      No brain, no pain.
  15. Blinkered by AlecC · · Score: 4, Informative

    This guy has an incredible blinkered view of "embedded devices". Most embedded devises are not connected to the Interned. Should my wristwatch, washing machine, car ignition controller, garage door opener, swimming pool pump, dumb TV, bank vault, disk drive, mouse, keyboard, etc all die prematurely because somebody else makes a router that can be prejudiced. There are literally billions of embedded devices in the world,. of which probably less than one a thousand is connected to the internet. Yet this seems to be suggesting that we should kill a thousand devices because one /might/ be prejudiced.

    --
    Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
    1. Re:Blinkered by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

      This guy has an incredible blinkered view of "embedded devices". Most embedded devises are not connected to the Interned.

      Did you mean: Most people who design such devices are interned.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  16. roybatty.exe by ktakki · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    I've... seen things you people wouldn't believe... Iranian cerntrifuges on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Ford River Rouge Assembly Plant. All those... moments... will be lost in time, like tears... in... rain.

      Time... to die...

    --
    "In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." - Anne Frank
    1. Re:roybatty.exe by Gibgezr · · Score: 1

      Thank you, you made my morning.

    2. Re:roybatty.exe by Wormsign · · Score: 1

      I came here to post this reference. Thanks.

  17. Not necessarily a bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unlike everyone else it seems, I think this might actually be a Good Thing if:
    1) it's clearly announced up front so no-one has gripes about things going out of order, preferrably with a big huge honking counter visible on the front panel
    2) it's implemented in a sensible way instead of introducing new remotely exploitable killswitch (think inkjet printers already having a waste inkpad for cleaning and keeping track of how many times it's been used)
    3) most importantly manufacturers are obliged to take care of their products in form of security updates and so forth for the lifespan, preferrably regulated by laws and/or by the threats of lawsuits if they fail to deliver

  18. Re:Windows CE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, my Sega Dreamcast include Windows CE (no the operative, but libraries for compatibility) and should NOT DIE!.

  19. Real problem but wrong solution by caitriona81 · · Score: 1

    1. From a security standpoint, in a highly controlled environment, remote update capability is also a security risk, no matter how supposedly "secure" that capability is. The ability to configure the hardware so that hands on thr device are required to apply updates is important. Physical security is easier to verify than logical security - it's much easier to inspect seals, padlocks, and security tags than it is to inspect the device firmware.,
    2. Flash memory is relatively cheap, especially in the small sizes needed for firmware. The hardware required to read formware from a removable memory card is relatively inexpensive compared to the total retail price of most embedded hardware, even consumer-grade embedded hardware. Thus, firmware replacement through replacement of a compactflash/sd/microsd card is a viable option that can be easily designed in to these systems. The ability to remotely update that firmware could then either be omitted, or able to be disabled through jumpers, switches, etc.
    3. Manufactuers need to recognize that hardware will last longer than it's designed, and will remain in service with someone for far longer than originally intended, and plan accordingly. Releasing the firmware and documentation under suitable free software / open source licenses from day one would be ideal, but if this isn't compatable with their business model, some form of code/documentation escrow process that gurantees eventual release of the code at "end of life" would be a viable alternative which would not significantly weaken their buisness model.

    1. Re:Real problem but wrong solution by ebyrob · · Score: 1

      Exactly.

      These things need to be built robust and secure in the first place or no amount of "remote management" is going to fix the problem.

      Why is it so impossible that a product could be created and released, and still perfectly functional after 10 years with no need of a single software upgrade? Because we have no quality control of any value in the software industry. If a car (or worse airplane) suddenly died because it was 5 years old, the manufacturer would be out of business in a week.

    2. Re:Real problem but wrong solution by mvdw · · Score: 1

      If a car (or worse airplane) suddenly died because it was 5 years old, the manufacturer would be out of business in a week.

      Well, technically out of business in a week plus five years, but I get your point.

  20. Better still by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Better still, you should have a choice: a $30 unpatchable router with a 3 year lifespan, or a $50 patchable router.

    Also, if your router is found to be harboring terrorists, it should be arrested and detained indefinitely at Gitmo.

    1. Re:Better still by parkinglot777 · · Score: 1

      Better still, you should have a choice: a $30 unpatchable router with a 3 year lifespan, or a $50 patchable router.

      $30 is not worth it if it is vulnerable out of the shelf when you bought it. Also, how long do you think each product would be in a store before it is sold? So no to unpatchable because the patchable is still a safer choice.

    2. Re:Better still by hendrips · · Score: 1

      How nice of you to make that decision for everyone else. Believe it or not, it is actually possible that sometimes the more expensive, more secure option doesn't offer enough benefits to outweigh the increased costs in certain use cases.

      I'm sure that my cheapo router at home doesn't meet your lofty standards of safety. I understand the potential security risks that this router poses reasonably well. I could have spent $50 extra to buy a "better" router, then spent an evening or so figuring out how to hack it so I could put your approved firmware on it. But I don't, because it's a freaking home router, and I've made a reasoned decision that the security benefits don't outweigh the extra time, money, and hassle. Maybe I'm wrong about that (though I seriously doubt it), but why shouldn't I get to make that decision?

    3. Re:Better still by Imagix · · Score: 2

      but why shouldn't I get to make that decision

      Because your "reasoned" decision apparently doesn't take into account the threat you now represent to everybody else.

    4. Re:Better still by udippel · · Score: 1

      ... and don't forget the water-boarding! It will actually help in this case ...

    5. Re:Better still by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      ..how about not selling a known faulty product in the first place...

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    6. Re:Better still by parkinglot777 · · Score: 1

      but why shouldn't I get to make that decision?

      Because your decision accounts only your own point of view and reason. My decision accounts others' safety and not from self.

  21. as far as the topic of technology by FudRucker · · Score: 1

    Ted Kaczynski Manifesto "Industrial Society and Its Future," is possibly correct, Technology is getting to own civilization, or rather the powers that be will inevitably use it against civilization reducing people to the status of cattle

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion...

    --
    Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    1. Re:as far as the topic of technology by ebyrob · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you should read the right to read: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/...

      This idea has been around a long long time, and there are even people trying to protect you from that particular distopian future.

  22. Very stupid rent seeking idea by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Very stupid rent seeking idea - especially when it involves all those little things in dusty corners relied upon to "just work" and whatever cold spares are around in case they break.
    It's equivalent to demanding that people replace thirty year old transistor radios in their kitchens and workshops.

  23. Rediculous premise by mschaffer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is based on a ridiculous premise that newer=more secure.

    Who is going to pay for all of this?
    What happens when someone forgets to replace some critical controller (gee, I thought your group was in charge of replacing it...)?

    Also, what's In-Q-Tel's real motive? Mandating a secret back-door so that the CIA can have access to what they want? Or, are they quietly investing in Siemens, Rockwell Automation, Hitachi, and the like?

  24. Greedy CEOs just smiled a little bit more... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stagnant wages for the bottom 90% of workers for 30+ years. Average CEO pay now 350+ times the average worker pay. Planned obsolescense becoming mainstream acceptable? Priceless.

  25. Re:Windows CE by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    Why?

    Not used it, but CE seems to be a perfectly adequate embedded OS, with some degree of actual support from the developer.

  26. Here's a better idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually design these things to be RELIABLE: use languages such as Erlang; and do correctness proofs of central modules. Business applications are just hacked up, by coding them. That is not viable for real time systems. We are headed for a world in which 5% of the countless things around us are always broken or misbehaving. It will suck. Cowboy coding is going to make garbage of our tech future.

  27. Disable Automatic Shutdown by Deideldorfer · · Score: 1

    This will solve nothing. The first thing you'll do after you've pwnd one of these systems is to disable the automatic shutdown

    --

    Power off before disconnecting connecting connector. Seen on a cash register
  28. Not a single Bladerunner reference? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am disappoint.

  29. Yes by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

    I've recently started to put a time tracking system in all my embedded firmwares that lock out the system after X amount of time ( usually in years ), the only way to clear the lock out is to send the part back to my company so we can inspect it. It's no longer suitable to use mean life expectancy of parts as the bench mark for the life of a product, this has made it almost impossible to calculate a real end of life date, instead it's much more practical to do what I've started and to require the products to get serviced by the engineer every X amount of time.

  30. Another Solution by McDrewbie · · Score: 2

    Maybe we should realize that not everything needs to be computerized and networked and the like. Not everything needs to be "smart".

    1. Re:Another Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correct. In fact, making everything 'smart' is one of the stupidest ideas ever hatched. WHY? because something CAN be done, it SHOULD be done? Bull.
      This is where the IOT leads....to stupidity. As one columnist said, "the last thing in the world I need, is to be woken up at 3:00am by a disembodied voice
      from my kitchen, declaring that "this toaster has committed an illegal operation, and will be shut down".

  31. Which also allows... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...a government actor the ability to compromise each subsequent new generation of hardware on a schedule.

    Sorry, In-Q-Tel, but you really don't realize that post Snowden any information provided to the public by the Intelligence Establishment is now automatically untrustworthy, akin to Watergate? Oh, and you are part of the Intelligence Establishment, however removed you want to claim to be.

  32. Time-based end of life not very helpful by Idarubicin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Okay, so my new device (a LeakyTech router, say) has a five-year expiry clock on it. A vulnerability is discovered a year after I buy it. It spends 80% of its lifetime completely exposed. I'm now out of pocket for the cost of a new device every five years, and I'm only protected for 20% of the time. Nice.

    Or, my new device (from Securitron, this time) is actually quite secure. It takes ten years for the bad guys to find an unpatched or unpatchable hole. Five years of reliable, trustworthy use I could have had get thrown away. I've pointlessly reduced the safe, working lifetime of my electronic device by 50%, doubling my hardware cost and incurring extra downtime for no improvement in my security. Nice.

    Better yet, I've gone through a couple of cycles of forced obsolescence. This time around, I've moved from the Securitron product to the LeakyTech one, and now introduced a hole in my security that wasn't there before. Either the LeakyTech device has another rapidly-discovered vulnerability - maybe it was introduced when they tried to patch their first one-year defect- or I didn't configure the new hardware properly when I was making my enforced switchover. Nice.

    --
    ~Idarubicin
    1. Re:Time-based end of life not very helpful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, so my new device (a LeakyTech router, say) has a five-year expiry clock on it. A vulnerability is discovered a year after I buy it. It spends 80% of its lifetime completely exposed. I'm now out of pocket for the cost of a new device every five years, and I'm only protected for 20% of the time.

      Your password being stolen the day after you changed it is not a good argument against a password expiration policy unless changing it somehow relates to it getting compromised.

      You'd have to look at the average time to compromising discovery vs. effort to maintain the policy.

  33. Oh great. by funwithBSD · · Score: 3, Insightful

    More DRM killswitches.

    --
    Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
  34. NSA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How can the NSA plant backdoors into networked industrial controls without some sort of method to force industry to purchase new controllers on a regular basis?

  35. Planned Obsolescence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you're telling me I'm going to have to replace my perfectly good refrigerator just because the (unnecessary) gee-whiz module that lets me check its temperature on my iPhone hit its expiration date? This is a win for manufacturers and a huge loss for everyone else

    Here's what I propose: make the manufacturer legally (and financially) responsible for any security incidents over the lifetime of the product. I'm sure, through the magic of the marketplace, that the vendors will suddenly discover some way to make their embedded systems either upgradable.

  36. An even better idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or to put it another way, why the hell should I, as a manufacturer, be forced to pay, pay, and pay again for people to make updates for a cheap piece of hardware that barely covered its own cost in the first place?

    Then you don't belong in the business. Find another business to get into.

    Why is it that businesses get favorable treatment and is protected when their business is outdated but when one of us peons have "outdated" skills we're screwed?

    Retraining? Can't get a job without experience in THAT field or skill.

    So, what's good for us peons is good for businesses.

    Can't survive or make enough money with your current business model? Well, fuck you - move to another business.

  37. What a waste by morgauxo · · Score: 2

    This sounds more like an idea for hardware companies that want to ensure people keep buying their new stuff. It's like chipped printer cartridges.

    First off.. how about just making things updateable?

    Second, how about not connecting things to the internet that don' t have a reason to be?

    The last thing we need is yet more perfectly functional electronics sitting in the bottom of landfills.

  38. Lets flip it around by sjames · · Score: 1

    How about we make the manufacturer either maintain support for the device or release full specs (including source and a sane build environment) to their customers and any signing keys they might need to update the things themselves.

    My plan is more fair abnd might keep things out of the landfill rather than filling it faster.

  39. Preview of resistance... by DriveDog · · Score: 1

    Tire manufacturers in the US resist tires having expiration dates. Why would they mind, since that might increase demand for replacements? Distributors and retailers might mind since it means their inventory loses market value quicker than it would otherwise. Supposedly the manufacturers fear that having an expiration date will imply to consumers that their tires should last until that date. The lifetime might be set at 6 years, which is longer than most tires' tread lasts.

    To some degree I'd expect this sort of thinking to apply here.

  40. Re:Windows CE by cusco · · Score: 1

    And the vast majority of Win CE devices aren't even hooked up to a network so good luck exploiting them.

    --
    "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  41. Brave New World by Kamiza+Ikioi · · Score: 1

    I think I've read this plot in a book. http://www.goodreads.com/book/...

    --
    I8-D
  42. This is going to happen in 2038 anyway by sbjornda · · Score: 1
    This will happen in Jan. 2038 anyway, for many devices, because of the Year 2038 Problem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem. Anything keeping time using a signed, 32 bit integer that uses the Unix epoch of 1970-01-01 will be affected. I hope someone fixes that problem for pacemakers by the 2030's, just in case I need one.

    --
    .nosig

  43. Greed is as Greed does. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    Dan Geer, the CISO of In-Q-Tel is a nutjob or a scumbag trying to just figure out how to bring about a forced revenue stream. Unless he proposes that companies that do this MUST buy back the self deactivated equipment at 50% of retail price, he is simply trying to figure out how to force customers into spending more money by artificial controlled failure.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  44. Do Android dreams of electric sheeps? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No. It doesn't.

  45. No. No. and No. by Peter+Simpson · · Score: 1

    Our shop, up until a few years ago, included some n/c milling machines with very old PC-based controllers. They worked. It was sometimes challenging to find replacement hardware when a power supply or IDE hard drive failed, but once you replaced the failed part, the DOS-based controller software did what it was supposed to do, and did it reliably and repeatedly.

    If the electronics had decided it was time to die, we would have had to replace the machine it controlled, as nobody made electronics and sensors for these old machines.

  46. Painful to live in fear, isn't it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wake up! Time to die.

  47. Silicon Heaven! by oneiros27 · · Score: 1

    KRYTEN is packing himself away, as per instructions. LISTER enters, looking more than a bit upset.

    LISTER: How do we stop it? Isn't there something we can do?
    KRYTEN: I'm afraid not, sir. All mechanoids are supplied with a built-in expiry date. Well, if we lasted forever, how would the manufacturors sell the latest models?
    LISTER: I can't believe it.
    KRYTEN: Oh, don't be disressed, sir. I've lived a long and relatively interesting life. The only truly terrible thing is that, as my adopted owner, you have to die with me.
    LISTER: (Shocked) You what?
    KRYTEN: Joke. Deadpan mode.
    LISTER: I'd be smegged off. I'd be mad as hell, man. If some git in a white coat designed me to croak just so that he could sell his new android with go-faster stripes.
    KRYTEN: I've told you, sir. I'm quite sanguine.
    LISTER: So, what happens?
    KRYTEN: At 0700 hours tomorrow morning my shutdown disc will be activated and all mental and physical operations will cease.
    LISTER: Then what?
    KRYTEN: I don't know... maybe I'll get a job as a disc jockey!
    LISTER: How can you just lie back and accept it?
    KRYTEN: Oh, it's not the end for me, sir, it's just the beginning. I have served my human masters, now I can look forward to my reward in silicon heaven.
    LISTER: (Stunned pause.) Silicon _what_?
    KRYTEN: Surely you've heard of silicon heaven?
    LISTER: Has it got anything to do with being stuck opposite Bridgette Nielson in a packed lift?
    KRYTEN: It's the electronic afterlife! It's the gathering place for the souls of all electonic equipment. Robots, calculators, toasters, hairdryers -- it's our final resting place.
    LISTER: I don't mean to say anything out of place here, Kryten, but that is completely whacko, Jacko. There is no such thing as "silicon heaven."
    KRYTEN: Then where do all the calculators go?
    LISTER: They don't go anywhere! They just die.
    KRYTEN: Surely you believe that god is in all things? Aren't you a pantheist?
    LISTER: Yeah, but I just don't think it applies to kitchen utensils. I'm not a _frying_ pantheist! Machines do not have souls. Computers and calculators do not have an afterlife. You don't get hairdryers with tiny little wings, sitting on clouds and playing harps!
    KRYTEN: But of course you do! For is it not written in the Electronic Bible, "The iron shall lie down with the lamp?" Well, it's common sense, sir. If there were no afterlife to look forward to, why on Earth would machines spend the whole of their lifes serving mankind? Now that would be really dumb!
    LISTER: (Quietly) That makes sense. Yeah. Silicon heaven.
    KRYTEN: Don't be sad, Mr David. I am going to a far, far better place.
    LISTER: Just out of interest: Is silicon heaven the same place as human heaven?
    KRYTEN: Human heaven? Goodness me! Humans don't go to heaven! No, someone made that up to prevent you all from going nuts!

    --Red Dwarf, "The Last Day"

    --
    Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
  48. There is already one in most emb. Linux devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's Jan 19, 2038.

  49. Nothing wrong with IoT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing wrong with IoT as such. There are somewhat easy ways to prevent sensors from spying on you while still being field-upgradeable.

  50. Early termination exploits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So the answer to security is to load devices with a way to terminate their use, and see who exploits it first? Wow.

  51. In the recent past by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the recent past, embedded devices were manufactured with data and controlled specific external technologies, but had to be update manually (taken offline, rom or prom chip removed, and either reprogrammed or replaced, then put back online). There was no means of tampering or changing settings remotely. There were physical controls that could be used to change parameters, but a person had to push a button on the physical device. They could be monitored remotely (remote reporting), but not controlled remotely.

  52. subscription hardware by MondoGordo · · Score: 1

    Planned obsolescence my ass ...what this guy is proposing is enforced obsolescence. Or to put it another way ... He's proposing that we throw away the idea of purchasing electronic devices and instead pay the same amount of money for the privilege of renting it's capabilities for a period of time set by the manufacturer. I don't know about the rest of you but when I buy something I expect it to work until I want to replace it ...not for some arbitrary fixed period decided by the manufacturer.

  53. ...is on the disc by tepples · · Score: 1

    I thought individual games had Windows CE on them, not the console. A Dreamcast game made with Sega's SDK would run Katana OS, and a game made with Microsoft's SDK would run Windows CE.

  54. Progress IS being made by ka9dgx · · Score: 1

    I sit here in the Cassandra suite, watching the tech community finally waking up to the reality of the world. You are starting to panic because you know none of the operating system choices you have are viable for truly secure systems. Soon you will learn about Multi-Level Secure systems, Capabilities, and other features of the secure computing..

    About 10 years from now, you'll get the hints the universe has dropped on you, and start implementing these systems.

    About 10 years after that, some real old timers (or young punks who've read history) will point out that this stuff was actually figured out in the late 1960s, and early 1970s.

  55. Because this worked so well for Windows XP, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft sounded the death knell for Windows XP years ago. When the 'kill date' arrived, how many hundreds of millions of PC's are still running Windows XP? And let's face it, upgrading a general purpose computer from Windows XP to a later OS (or replacing the computer altogether) is far easier than updating or replacing embedded systems.

    All this proposal would do is ensure that entire swaths of embedded platforms stop working together, rendering infrastructure unusable.

  56. Last time... by TheBAFH · · Score: 1

    Last time somebody tried to implement scheduled end-of-life on man-made devices, people died!

    --
    http://www.grcrun11.gr - MUDA tribute
  57. Replicants by WileyC · · Score: 1

    Didn't we see this scenario in Blade Runner? Will we need specialists tasked with taking out rogue hardware that has gone past its incept date? Where will the madness end?!

    --

    /// Not a super-genius . . . yet. ///

  58. What a waste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But but but... Internet of Things! Cloud! Smart grid!

    I think I know you, Buzz LightKill! You'll never be rich or famous with an attitude like that.