Endpoint

7/23/2015
11:00 AM
Lysa Myers
Lysa Myers
Commentary
Connect Directly
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail vvv
50%
50%

Internet of Things: Anything You Track Could Be Used Against You

Lawyers - not security advocates - have fired the first salvos over wearable tech privacy. The results may surprise you.

Security advocates have been bringing up privacy concerns surrounding wearable devices in the Internet of Things a lot lately. But why would anyone care about the information tracked with fitness devices? Unsurprisingly, the first real-world answer to this question has come from lawyers in a couple of recent court cases.

What data are useful?

Those fitness trackers that have become omnipresent on people’s wrists are essentially behavior trackers. In ways analogous to how cookies track your activity online, fitness trackers track your activity in “meatspace,” the world of flesh and blood and the opposite of cyberspace. Trackers, as the name implies, allow you to track when you move, how far you move, how long you move for, where you move and, increasingly in what ways you move.

As fitness trackers become more sophisticated, they will be able to tell the difference between the movement of restful and fitful sleep, or skiing versus running versus climbing stairs, and log these data accordingly. Devices with heart rate monitors can give more accurate accounts of the exertion of exercise, or the soundness of sleep. Devices with GPS can tell when you’re exercising at home or at the gym, and they can track the length or path of your routes when you exercise outside. Devices that include altimeters can track changes in elevation during your activity as well.

Obviously, the more information that is tracked, the more useful it is for the purposes of accurately assessing caloric deficit or changes in performance. Some people share these data publicly, or within private forums to reap the benefits of collaboration with others who are tracking their own fitness. And some people choose to keep these data private. But the fact that this wealth of data is being tracked at all means that it may be of interest to others.

What is being done with the data?

The biggest fear most people have about these data is that a stalker or burglar could use them. But there are more mundane uses for third party purposes. We’re already starting to see tracking information used by insurance companies (as a “carrot” rather than as a “stick”) to positively motivate people to increase healthy activity. 

Perhaps less surprisingly, law enforcement and lawyers are using this information to prosecute crimes. In one case, according to a recent article in Engadget, a plaintiff accused a defendant of invading her home and attacking her while she slept. However tracking data used by the defense was able to show that the plaintiff had not been sleeping at the time of the alleged attack. In another case last year, the plaintiff introduced her own tracking data to show decreased activity as a result of an injury.

These examples clearly show that there’s a potential upside and a downside to storing a record of your activity day and night. (Presumably the first plaintiff didn’t expect that the result of bringing her claim would be getting charged with a misdemeanor herself!) Much like tracking online behavior, it can be used for good or for ill. The question that we need to be asking ourselves before committing to recording this information is whether the potential upside outweighs the potential downside.

I suspect for most people, their wearable experiment is so short-lived that it’s a non-issue. For those who do wear their device on a regular basis for a long period of time, the majority will probably find the benefit far outweighs the risk. But to those people for whom these devices pose a risk, the risk is considerable. And as crime is by nature opportunistic and somewhat unpredictable, it is hard to know when or if that person at risk will be you.

Lysa Myers began her tenure in malware research labs in the weeks before the Melissa virus outbreak in 1999. She has watched both the malware landscape and the security technologies used to prevent threats from growing and changing dramatically. Because keeping up with all ... View Full Bio
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
The Year in Security 2018
This Dark Reading Tech Digest explores the biggest news stories of 2018 that shaped the cybersecurity landscape.
Flash Poll
How Enterprises Are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How Enterprises Are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
Data breach fears and the need to comply with regulations such as GDPR are two major drivers increased spending on security products and technologies. But other factors are contributing to the trend as well. Find out more about how enterprises are attacking the cybersecurity problem by reading our report today.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-6487
PUBLISHED: 2019-01-18
TP-Link WDR Series devices through firmware v3 (such as TL-WDR5620 V3.0) are affected by command injection (after login) leading to remote code execution, because shell metacharacters can be included in the weather get_weather_observe citycode field.
CVE-2018-20735
PUBLISHED: 2019-01-17
** DISPUTED ** An issue was discovered in BMC PATROL Agent through 11.3.01. It was found that the PatrolCli application can allow for lateral movement and escalation of privilege inside a Windows Active Directory environment. It was found that by default the PatrolCli / PATROL Agent application only...
CVE-2019-0624
PUBLISHED: 2019-01-17
A spoofing vulnerability exists when a Skype for Business 2015 server does not properly sanitize a specially crafted request, aka "Skype for Business 2015 Spoofing Vulnerability." This affects Skype.
CVE-2019-0646
PUBLISHED: 2019-01-17
A Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists when Team Foundation Server does not properly sanitize user provided input, aka "Team Foundation Server Cross-site Scripting Vulnerability." This affects Team.
CVE-2019-0647
PUBLISHED: 2019-01-17
An information disclosure vulnerability exists when Team Foundation Server does not properly handle variables marked as secret, aka "Team Foundation Server Information Disclosure Vulnerability." This affects Team.