| A good point - perhaps the focus is too heavy on paperwork or "measurable compliance". From experience in this sector though, I think the real issue is a lack of technical awareness and competency with enough breadth to extend into the "digital" domain - often products like these are developed by people from the "power" domain (who don't necessarily recognise off the top of their head that 512-bit RSA is a #badthing and not enough to use to protect aggregated energy systems that are controllable from a single location). Clearly formal diplomas/certificates are not needed for that - some practical hands-on knowledge and experience would help a lot there. When a product gets a network interface on it, or runs programmable firmware, we should hear discussions about A/B boot, signatures, key revocation, crypto agility to enable post quantum cryptography algorithms, etc. Instead, the focus will be on low-cost development of a mobile app, controlled via the lowest-possible-cost vendor server back-end API that gets the product shipped to market quickly. Let's not even go near the "embedded system" mindset of not patching and staying up to date - embedded systems are a good place to meet Linux 2.4 or 2.6, even today... Vendors ship whatever their CPU chipset vendor gives them as a board support package, generally as a "tossed over the wall" lump of code. I doubt many of these issues (which seem to be commercial/price driven) will be resolved through paperwork, as you say. |
How someone would wave a 20 year old piece of paper as evidence that they know how to use solar tech that was developed last year, I don’t know.