Much of the time, when we discuss the Internet of Things, we’re looking at issues from an end-user perspective. We talk about the potential for IoT options like mobile medical applications and wearable devices, and ponder how to connect smart devices to other nodes like the above to offer next-generation care. Though we’re only just beginning to explore such networking models, the possibilities seem nearly infinite.
That being said, most of the responsibility for enabling and securing these devices still lies with the manufacturers, as healthcare networks typically don’t integrate fully with IoT devices as of yet.
So I was intrigued to find a recent article in Dark Reading which lays out some security considerations manufacturers of IoT devices should keep in mind. Not only do the suggestions give you an idea of how vendors should be thinking about vulnerabilities, they also offer some useful insights for healthcare organizations.
Security research Lysa Myers offers IoT device-makers several recommendations to consider, including the following:
- Notify users of any changes to device features. In fact, it may make sense to remind them repeatedly of significant changes, or they may simply ignore them out of habit.
- Put a protocol in place for handling vulnerability reports, and display your vulnerability disclosure policy prominently on your website. Ideally, Myers notes, makers of IoT medical devices should send vulnerability reports to the FDA.
- When determining how to handle a vulnerability issue, let the most qualified person decide what should happen. In the case of automated medical diagnosis, for example, the right person would probably be a doctor.
- Make it quick and easy to update IoT device software when you find an error. Also, make it simple for customers to spot fraudulent updates.
- Create an audit log for all devices, even those that might seem too mundane to interest criminals, as even the least important of devices can assist criminals in launching a DDoS attack or spamming.
- See to it that users can tell when the changes made to an IoT device’s software are made by the authorized user or a designated representative rather than a cybercriminal or other inappropriate person.
- Given that many IoT devices require cloud-based services to operate, it’s important to see that end users aren’t dropped abruptly with no cloud alternative. Manufacturers should give users time to transition their service if discontinuing a device, going out of business or otherwise ending support for their own cloud-based option.
If we take a high-level look at these recommendations, there’s a few common themes to be considered:
Awareness: Particularly in the case of IoT devices, it’s critical to raise awareness among both technical staffers and users of changes, both in features and security configurations.
Protection: It’s becoming more important every day to protect IoT devices from attacks, and see to it that they are configured properly to avoid security and continuity failures. Also, see to that these devices are protected from outages caused by vendor issues.
Monitoring: Health IT leaders should find ways to integrate IoT devices into their monitoring routine, tracking their behavior, the state of security updates to their software and any suspicious user activity.
As the article suggests, IoT device-makers probably need to play a large role in helping healthcare organizations secure these devices. But clearly, healthcare organizations need to do their part if they hope to maintain these devices successfully as health IT models change.