That’s more nanny cam than IoT.
I got a local storage iot camera and today it alerted me to a chicken in my carport. Delightful.
They have to open an app every time they go to the bathroom? That is dumb.
I have a bunch of Wi-Fi bulbs, but they’re connected to Alexa. It’s pretty sweet.
My iPad keeps trying to connect to my stove, which for some unfathomable reason shows up as a WiFi access point. Probably because half way through trying to set it up according to the obtuse manual I got frustrated and aborted the process. Now it sits there on my network showing up as active, when of course it is nothing of the sort.
And this is why smart switches win out over smart bulbs every single time. Unless you want colours.
Lutron Caseta FTW!
I have seen many more appliances doing that. It used to just be printers and such, but now everything pricey and IoT is built as its own access point so that you can connect and control it from your phone even without any native network. It just creates a lot of wifi nwk pollution since it has a marketing feature name like “EZ-Connect” which makes a lot of people enable it even if they don’t need it.
Yeah, the stove is a nice Samsung gas range, very good to cook on, and I also have a Samsung washer and drier combo that, you guessed it, has wifi connectivity. Those, I have not even bothered to hook up. The only reason I even thought about it for the stove was out of curiosity. I have zero need to tell my appliances what to do when I’m not right there anyhow. I mean, I guess some yuppie somewhere does, but really.
HAXXORED
Btw, your lamb chops are done.
Heh. I remembered that it connects to my phone by bluetooth. So bye bye post.
9/10 Dentists agree, don’t buy a toothbrush with fucking internet connectivity.
Looks like maybe not true:
Update 2 — 2/9/2024 6:30am PT: The security company at the nexus of the original report that three million toothbrushes were used in a DDOS attack has now retracted the story and claimed it was a result of a mistranslation — but according to the news outlet that published the initial report, that statement isn’t true. The reports of this story are not based on a mistranslation by the media. The publication claims Fortinet presented the story as having actually happened and approved the text of the article, which had been submitted to Fortinet prior to publication.
“To clarify, the topic of toothbrushes being used for DDoS attacks was presented during an interview as an illustration of a given type of attack, and it is not based on research from Fortinet or FortiGuard Labs. It appears that due to translations the narrative on this topic has been stretched to the point where hypothetical and actual scenarios are blurred.” - Fortinet.
Still WTF Wifi Toothbrush?
Ah, I know exactly how this happened then - Chinese Whispers. It was on some security vendor slide of possible future scenarios and attacks in the wild west of the internet of things and someone somewhere then took that to mean it had already happened and had been discovered in Fortinet’s research divisions.
Do TVs count as the dumbass Internet of Things?
Basically, the TV had been generating Universal Plug and Play IDs and had, over the course of several years, convinced Snow’s computer that there were essentially an infinite number of devices on their network. Snow’s smart TV, a Hisense 50Q8G, had inadvertently created a denial-of-service attack on their PC.