Re: [Full-disclosure] Paper on the law and Implantable Devices security

[Jeffrey Walton <noloader () gmail com>]

> ...even if from the legal standpoint with the
> main concern of liability.
Should that be lack of liability? (Its amazing what corporate America
gets away with by bribing congress (err, 'PAC contributions'))

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 6:44 AM, Gadi Evron <ge () linuxbox org> wrote:
> A new research paper from the Freedom And Law Center deals with issues
> that some of us keep raising these past few years, and does a good job
> at it - bionic hacking (or cybernetic hacking if you prefer).
>
> "Killed by Code: Software Transparency in Implantable Medical Devices"
> outlines some of the history of these devices and even shows some cases
> where devices have been recalled (likely due to software issues).
>
> Some of the paper's recommendations are especially interesting, such as
> to create a database of implantable devices code, so that if the vendor
> disappears it can still be patched (I rephrased).
>
> While unintentional, I am considered the father of this field (not that
> I'm complaining) and I can't even begin to tell you how excited I am
> that a field I have been evangelizing for some years now if finally
> getting more attention -- even if from the legal standpoint with the
> main concern of liability.
>
> Still, I can't help but maintain some skepticism that before some
> disaster happens (to us or others) this won't be taken too seriously.
>
> The paper can be found here:
> http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2010/transparent-medical-devices.html
>
> Here's a 2007 Wired article covering the subject from a talk I gave,
> covering the subject from a different perspective:
> http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2007/08/will-the-bionic/
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.