|
|
Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
|
This raises the stakes in hacking | by binkley | 2008-03-19 14:45:35 |
| Ah, yes that one. |
by aix tom |
2008-03-19 15:40:46 |
Was quite a discussion somewhere about that somewhere else a while ago.
A few points were that basically cryptographic security in that direction would be bad idea.
First, to connect to the pacemaker the programming has to be held on your skin while you don't move. If someone is able to hold the programming device to your skin while you don't move he might just as well stab you. (Is that the equivalent to "having access to the hardware?" ;-) )
Quote from Article : "Current devices also only provide short-range wireless access, though that /could/ change as technology improves"
The main point AGAINST that is, that they have to operate to replace the battery. So any technological improvement will definitely go into prolonging battery live, rather than boost transmission distance. The same goes for putting encryption and stuff into those devices. That would need more power, so you would have to operate more often than you would have to otherwise. And a operation has a higher risk than an hacking attempt on the pacemaker.
Also, in case of an emergency you definitely don't want the doctor to be unable to reset the device because he can't connect, so the passwords or keys or whatever would have to be available in every hospital, which would make obtaining them through social engineering pretty easy. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
Could a blood-battery power cell drive a pacemaker | by themadkansan | 2008-03-19 15:43:24 |
|
My guess would be no. | by toysbfun | 2008-03-19 15:57:31 |
|
No battery, just the cell. | by themadkansan | 2008-03-19 16:04:45 |
|
So then we might have | by binkley | 2008-03-19 16:17:06 |
|
|
[Todays Cartoon Discussion]
[News Index]
|
|
