• towerful@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    And to then certify it’s tightened to spec and send that cert to a logging server, for things like aviation

    • agitatedpotato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Why doesn’t the wrench then only have the ability to talk to a local server and that server have internet then? If that were the case the wrench would have no reason to download anything from the Internet, just speak to the local server. Probably wont fix every vulnerability but it can’t be more vulnerable.

      • towerful@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yup, that would be sensible security practices.

        The wrench has a web UI to program it or monitor it. It also talks a few “standardised” car-manufacturer protocols for recieving and sending instructions/measurements/certifications. And it can send also send stuff to a local history server.

        The majority of the CVEs seem to exist in its onboard webUI system, with a few in the manufacturing protocols.

        But yes, IoT devices should be on an isolated vlan or on pvlans. That should be standard practice.

        Access from wrench->server should be via a firewall that logs connections. And access from management->wrench should be via firewall with logging.
        There is no reason for unauthorized people to have access to the wrenches network, and there is no need for the wrench to communicate with anything other than the local history server.