I worked on pacemaker firmware about 15 years ago. Even back then, this kind a scenario would have been very improbable.

To reprogram a pacemaker, you needed first to activate a reed switch with a magnet, then transmit the right commands, properly encrypted and with their matching checksums.

Parameters could of course not be set outside of safe bounds and in case of software failure there was a safe default mode that was running on dedicated hardware.

Either there are some really dumb companies developing active implants out there, or the article and allegations are sensationalistic conjectures.

Edit: I don't know much about brain implants, maybe induced currents in the electrode are enough to trigger some kind of seizure. This scenario may be possible. For a pacemaker though, I doubt that it would be possible to trigger a single extrasystole with normal electric or RF devices.

Uh. I thought it was all about parasitic currents. Strong enough EM fields induce those in the wires, brain gets stimulation and goes into seizure, this sort of stuff.

(Neighbor comment[1] suggests those devices don't have anything like firmware upgrades, so don't see why they need an actual receiver)

___

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14712193

That would be the obvious interpretation, yes. Induced currents from EMI can be dangerous, and implants don't necessarily have the luxury of shielding, but if that was why... then how would encryption help?

I'll fully admit I'm speculating. It just seems odd.

You don't need to intentionally create a radio receiver to inadvertently pick up EMI. Simple thin wires will end up with this same parasitic current problem, by nature of their shape and composition.

Shielding around these thin wires can be impractical in many situations due to the limited space afforded by the brain and skull.

To me it sounds more like the device received too much current on it's driver circuit and shut down to prevent damage to the device which is exactly what an implant should do since shutting down just means a trip to your doctor to get it (wirelessly) turned back on as opposed to dangerous and costly brain surgery to replace it.

These isn't a lot you can do about this sort of problem. The electrode used to stimulate is the main entry point for RF interference and you can't shield it for 3 reasons.

1)It adds size. You are effectively stabbing yourself in the brain with a coat hanger. Smaller is inherently better.

2)It adds mass. The difference in mass between a brain implant and your brain itself leads to brain damage in high kinetic situations like car accidents due to the different rates of acceleration.

3)Shielding an electrical stimulator prevents it from electrically stimulating thus defeating the purpose of the implant in the first place.

What you probably need is a robust RF limiting front end to protect the device from unintended signals which is a major design challenge depending on the nature of the stimulating signal and permissible heating.

Couldnt you wrap the brain in a EM-Cage? Basically a copper wire meshed hoodie?

Sorry, could not resist: MC Parkinson in the house yo, with bling on his mind.

Encryption would fix it if the device was misinterpreting ambient EM as commands. If the device is this poorly designed I'd suggest that a lawsuit could be filed.

It wouldn't fix any of the other many possible failure modes, the sum total of which strikes me as much more likely to be the issue. Electronics can get weird.