Part II — The Internet of Things and the Solution to Centralization…
The full article was originally published by James Sutton on Medium. Read the full article here.
Is The Internet of Things and Centralization a Security Weakness?
As discussed in ‘Part I — So What is The Internet of Things?’ an alarming 84% of companies have stated that they have had security breaches related to the Internet of Things. The need is present and without a doubt important for IoT to have a protocol in which the messaging data layer is secured. The Tangle offers this solution as the “Transport Layer”.
The medical industry doesn’t just hold extremely sensitive patient data, but handles connected devices that act in critical service. Critical service being that if the device fails a persons life could be in danger.
Jessica Davis wrote in the article ‘The security risk storm is here: Medical device threats are real and a patient safety risk’ found that a recent study from the University of California Cyber Team funded by MedCrypt found that a few healthcare delivery organizations and vendors believe between 100 and 1,000 patients had adverse events from compromised devices. The article stated, “There’s at least some self-reported evidence that some patients are being harmed by compromised medical devices,” said Christian Dameff, UC San Diego researcher and emergency room doctor at the HIMSS Media Security Forum in San Francisco on Tuesday. Dameff, along with his colleague, Jeffrey Tully, UC Davis security researcher and pediatrician, outline a recent simulation of what happens when a patient’s medical device gets hacked. The patient, represented by an actor, presented signs of chest pain to a team of nurses and doctors. The team went through normal procedures to treat the patient directly reflecting his symptoms. However, the ‘patient’s’ pacemaker was malfunctioning and routine attempts to use a magnet to fix the problem didn’t work. As a result, the ‘patient’ kept dying and coming back to life because the hacked pacemaker kept shocking the patient at the wrong time. What’s also concerning was the reaction from clinicians who took part in the simulation were completely unaware the device had been compromised, said Dameff. They were also asked if they would know what to do if a device was hacked, and all of them said ‘no.’ What’s more, none of the team had been trained in reacting to medical device hacks”.