News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Malicious attack on Wikipedia – what we know and what we’... by owenmarshall on Saturday September 07, 2019 @12:56PM (#20904977)
Brakes squeal when they are wearing down. If I put a penny in the tread of my tires and see Abe Lincoln’s head I know they are bald. If my head lamps go out I’ll notice; if it’s a brake light I get a red indicator lamp on my dash that says I have a problem.

Let’s talk about liability when home routers make a revving engine sound when they push too many packets per second, or start playing a “buckle up” warning chime every 6 seconds if they see packets heading to a C2 server.

Re:Malicious attack on Wikipedia – what we know and what we’... by betaby on Saturday September 07, 2019 @01:14PM (#20905112)
I'm liable if water/sewage breaks in my condo and there won't be any 'squeal'. Analogies work but are not equal. My point is that there should be liability for the malfunctioning internet equipment, definitely so for businesses.
Re:Malicious attack on Wikipedia – what we know and what we’... by owenmarshall on Saturday September 07, 2019 @01:31PM (#20905229)
Maybe. Or maybe liability exists for outside parties in that case: the plumber who was drunk when they put the pipes in, the architect who designed the wall in such a way to force a ton of joints in one weak spot, the building inspector who signed off on it... heck, maybe the water company is causing a water hammer to form because their pumps are busted.

Now if my home owners insurance finds that I flooded the downstairs condo because I fell asleep with the bath running, you bet I’ll pay.

But no matter what, either of your examples have a robust regulatory structure around them in terms of licensing and inspections. That is why liability works - without those structures you can’t say “you fucked up, therefore you pay”.

I’m all for adding liability into the system but if we do we must do it in a way that spreads the burden to the right places (IoT manufacturers, negligent ISPs) and doesn’t push it straight to the consumer.

Re:Malicious attack on Wikipedia – what we know and what we’... by betaby on Saturday September 07, 2019 @01:35PM (#20905257)
So same should be with IoT? Programmer 'who was drunk when they put the' code should be liable.
Re:Malicious attack on Wikipedia – what we know and what we’... by owenmarshall on Saturday September 07, 2019 @01:44PM (#20905315)
>> I’m all for adding liability into the system but if we do we must do it in a way that spreads the burden to the right places (IoT manufacturers, negligent ISPs) and doesn’t push it straight to the consumer.

Now, having said that, when the limb of my tree knocks the power line off my house I have to pay to fix it, but the electric company is on the hook to send someone to turn the line off so my electrician can work on it.

ISPs have to be in the liability chain too: if one of their customers is talking to a C&C server and participating in a DDoS they have to switch off the customer until repairs can be made.