Spitballing IoT Security

Wed Oct 26 21:38:59 UTC 2016

In message <11718.1477517100 at segfault.tristatelogic.com>, "Ronald F. Guilmette" writes:
> In short, if sensible regulations requiring "safe" designs for IoT products
> were to come into force in one locale, it is not only possible, but
> actually quite likely that they would affect the whole market.  If a given
> Far East manufacturer was required to have safety built into the kernel
> of its toasters in order to be able to sell said toasters, say, in the
> United States... or even just in California...  would they really go to
> the trouble to strip out the additional "safety" part of their firmware
> when manufacturing what is essentially the same product, but destined
> for other markets?  I think not.  (A question for the audience:  How has
> FCC regulation of the maximum power output of WiFi routers affected the
> worldwide market for such devices, over time?  I honestly don't know, but
> I suspect that there has been a good effect, over time, on the whole
> worldwide market.)

FCC regulation has caused manufactures to do a US version and a rest
of the world version.  They have over regulated.  A simple list
for location should be enough with default on unknown which leaves
Wifi off until set.

Mark
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka at isc.org