Didn't we try this same argument already with gun manufacturers? How well did that work?
The problem with holding manufacturers responsible for releasing a potentially dangerous product is that the manufacturers view compliance with regulation as an obstacle to maximizing profits, and seek to avoid it. Manufacturing is also centralized and they organize and lobby politicians to influence regulation.
Consumers are distributed and disorganized, and I predict that blame for not securing your IOT device(s) will stay with consumers for the foreseeable future.
I agree some standardized testing would be a good idea though.
Not only that presumably gun manufacturers do not insert backdoors on their products or otherwise make the easier to steal through gross negligence. Many of these IoT manufactures clearly paid zero attention to security. That's unacceptable.
Right, but if you keep your gun under your mattress, someone steals it, and then uses it to shoot someone halfway across the world it's not you're fault.
It's like door locks -- we use them because thieves exist and we would rather manage keys than go though the effort of recovering our stolen goods, but even if someone doesn't have one, it's still always the fault of the thief.
The problem with holding manufacturers responsible for releasing a potentially dangerous product is that the manufacturers view compliance with regulation as an obstacle to maximizing profits, and seek to avoid it. Manufacturing is also centralized and they organize and lobby politicians to influence regulation.
Consumers are distributed and disorganized, and I predict that blame for not securing your IOT device(s) will stay with consumers for the foreseeable future.
I agree some standardized testing would be a good idea though.