[hn_submit]

Why doesn't the U.S. simply ban all Chinese products that have an internet-connected computer in them? That would solve almost all security problems in one strike and force Chinese manufacturers to communicate via Bluetooth and update software through USB sticks or memory cards.

The apps communicating with said devices through Bluetooth obviously can't connect to the internet either otherwise there'd still be an avenue for subversion.

Just banning one Chinese product category at a time willy nilly doesn't help as there are a zillion other product categories of Chinese stuff with internet connections. From toys (with camera's in them), to refrigerators, power converters, microwaves, televisions to smartphones.

[bsenftner]

Going one at a time, in small apparently myopic focus is how a politician shakes the lobbyist money tree. "You could be next!"

[Tangurena2]

There's a box being sold called "SuperBox". It claims to be able to stream any movie/video. The claim is "just pay $300 and you won't need to subscribe to any streaming service anymore." However, part of what it does is hacks your home network and tries to take over every thing on that network. And it sends this all back to China. The vast majority of people buying & installing these are just ordinary people but some will be executives, or people working for the feds. Did they bring their work laptop home and plug it in to their network? So it can get attacked outside the office firewall? Remember how stuxnet was spread?

This is a podcast about it: https://darknetdiaries.com/episode/172/

[hn_submit]

I've always been suspicious why Chinese companies are adding internet capability to products where it doesn't make sense. Why would a power converter need internet capability? TCP/IP capability...maybe. But internet? Internet means "the whole world can access my device." Same with IP cameras. Or EV chargers.

And they require it. Without internet connectivity the device simply won't work. This sounds fishy to me.

These devices should only be allowed to access local network addresses and no (internet) gateways.

[eej71]

While that seems helpful it would not be enough. Consider this as a counter example.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Olympic_Games

[nono_ninja]

Probably why you couldn't ban all at once...there'd be not much left.

[petesergeant]

Why does Ross, the largest Friend, not simply eat the other five?

[jbstack]

Removing an internet connection doesn't really solve much when you're talking about autonomous AI-driven robots with vision and hearing. It's a whole different category to toys, refrigerators, etc. My refrigerator isn't going to suddenly pick up a weapon and start attacking things on command. Nor does it have an easy way to receive instructions through side channels. I'm not saying I agree with Trump's policy - but removing internet isn't a solution either.

[hn_submit]

You have to realize that in a war China will use everything they can against us, including power converters (force a blackout), cars (drive-by-wire car will drive into a tree to kill a high ranking official), routers (disconnect the internet to make command and control difficult for our military). And a zillion other things.

A refrigerator could be forced to overheat and burn you house down killing you and your family. It may sound far fetched but if they believe it will help their cause they won't hesitate one second.

This issue needs to be solved once and for all NOW. Not piecemeal.

[jbstack]

Yes, I agree. I think you misunderstood me though. I wasn't saying refrigerators aren't an attack vector. I was using them as a comparison to make the point that a policy of blocking internet access is far less effective on an autonomous robot with vision and hearing (since it can easily communicate in other ways) than for a refrigerator (where the policy actually has a good chance of disabling the attack).

You need something more than just disabling internet access if you don't want robots sourced from military rivals to remain a strong risk.