|
| bri3d wrote:
| More like "farm equipment manufacturers have insecure backoffice
| web services" with some tenuous and unsubstantiated highly
| contrived links to fanciful action movie sub-plots.
|
| I agree that automotive and farm equipment have generally
| mediocre security track records and that, with the addition of
| remote connectivity, these issues are concerning. But all
| hyperbole and breathless reporting like this gains us is an
| excuse for repair hostility under the guise of "security."
| userbinator wrote:
| _is an excuse for repair hostility under the guise of
| "security."_
|
| That's what every other company has been trying to do too, not
| just farm equipment manufacturers. If you look between the
| lines you'll find that the "security industry" is largely in
| favour of corporate-authoritarianism. Thankfully, not everyone
| is stupid, and I suspect farmers are actually more likely to
| spot the BS.
| mistrial9 wrote:
| I believe by gut feeling, that the "heavy farm equipment with
| tracking and repossession built-in" example directly inflames
| ancient tensions between farmers and remote management. The
| psychological trigger of the topic adds power and excitement to
| both sides of that, and security shenanigans multiply, with
| publicity.
| _hyn3 wrote:
| Goes right along with "Bugs allowed hackers to dox John Deere
| tractor owners" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26903482
| OJFord wrote:
| 'Goes right along with' as in it's the same work, this
| submission is just blog author's write up of a presentation of
| it (or whatever) at Def Con 29.
|
| The researcher's write-up from April: https://sick.codes/leaky-
| john-deere-apis-serious-food-supply... (submitted thrice but
| not discussed.)
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-10-11 23:00 UTC) |