Somebody learns the term “single point of failure” now…
I wonder how much money was saved by having someone manage the freezer section, or how much money was earned by not having an empty fridge.
The management quarterly meeting PowerPoint presentation says x3 more yachts for us.
Attacking a countries food supply and food reserves really seems like a act of war.
The term “hackers” really downplays the severity of these kinds of cyber attacks IMO. It makes it kind of sound like a teenager in a basement somewhere, as opposed to some foreign state cyber warfare group or something along those lines.
Also it’s madness that systems like these are connected directly to the internet without read-only permissions implemented. Controls should only be accessible locally on some kind of airgap or local seperate VLAN.
Please stop with the acts of war or terrorism BS. The article also mentions “in-store pricing powered by electronic shelf labels” so lets not ignore this is about multi-billion companies trying to suck every penny out of our pocket. If these companies design and manufacture and buy stupid hardware that is susceptible to such hacking, they really deserve it. I mean they really do.
Second, this is a good thing. Systems will be hardened now. You think there would be any other fucking way they would upgrade their security unless something like this happens? Beatings will continue until security improves. This is why even chaotic hackers that cause damage and inconvenience are ultimately a positive force on our IT infrastructure. Think of it as an ecosystem and evolutionary pressure. Free marketplace of security models.
Agreed. It’s also a massive jump to call a grocery chain’s fridges a countries ‘food reserves’
Also it’s madness that systems like these are connected directly to the internet without read-only permissions implemented.
Water systems in the US are, too. And they have been hacked.
The main plot of Ghost in the Shell 3. sigh
Morgan Freeman Narrating: It was in that moment, they realized the IoT was a very, very dangerous idea.
Remote monitoring 👍
Remote control 👎
David Attenborough butting in: “That’s when they should have realized it, but did not. A fatal mistake.”
Why the fuck does a refrigerator need to be on a network?
Speculation to your question, for monitoring and control.
For monitoring, log temperatures and send error message if it gets too high. Data could be used if any legal question come up about food spoilage.
For control, I’m guessing there’s times you want to shut it off or enable/disable defrost. Easier to do that at a computer than have controls that are either a pain inthe ass to get to, or too easy for some moron to mess with.
That being said, it should be on a local network and have no access to the internet. However a chain store would probably want the data sent to HQ, so the computer would need to be on the network.
Maybe they learned they need to air gap critical infrastructure, and leave the management to on-site humans who are paid well enough not to hold their inventory for ransom.
“Learn” hahahahaha
Did having centralized control and monitoring of coolers save a fake number of man-hours on a spreadsheet instead of paying a store employee already on the clock to check temperatures occasionally?
They’re going to keep doing it because the spreadsheet says the risk is worth saving those fictional man-hour costs.
They will calculate that they spend less on recovering from these cyberattacks than they would on paying staff fairly, and carry on.
2010s - We made everything smart, networked, and IOT!
2015-2025 - We need you to put your personal details into everything, everywhere, all the time!
2026-??? - We invented a machine that can hack everything on earth and steal all data for nefarious purposes.
Alright then, No more IoT refrigerators in my home.
Don’t worry. It is surely only a misbehaving LLM…
Hacks and attacks like this will explode with AI.
We’re making sentient refrigerators that can’t keep food frozen.
