backtop


Print 12 comment(s) - last by Meyerstein Con.. on Sep 7 at 5:31 AM

It's possible medical devices face an immediate threat that medical researchers will have to deal with

Modern technology has helped save countless lives, but there is a growing threat that some biotech companies may be ignoring - implanted devices that can be hacked by skilled criminals. 

There 
haven't been specific cases of these devices being compromised, but recent demonstrations at Black Hat -- and an increase in online reports of medical device security issues -- has lawmakers worried about loopholes that must be fixed. 

Earlier in the year, a security expert named Jerome Radcliffe 
hacked his insulin pump's hardware onstage by reverse-engineering the device. He was able to use a small radio frequency transmitter to disable the device, along with controlling how much insulin was pumped using the pump. 

"My initial reaction was that this was really cool from a technical perspective," Radcliffe said in an interview with the AP. "The second reaction was one of maybe sheer terror, to know that there's no security around the devices which are a very active part of keeping me alive." 

Although it wasn't easy to successfully hack the device, security experts find it alarming that Radcliffe was able to intercept the pump's wireless signals.  

Individual hackers likely won't be able to suddenly tamper with these devices anytime soon, but criminals familiar with medical technology could pose a threat if they attack a specific device.  Furthermore, Medtronic, one of the biggest medical device suppliers, doubts whether or not Radcliffe and other hackers would be able to tamper with wireless devices in the real world. 

Even so, researchers are actively working to design a jamming device to prevent anyone from tampering and changing how medical devices are supposed to work. 

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is facing increased scrutiny from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and lawmakers concerned that certain medical devices can be hacked. Of note, Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.) are concerned that devices like insulin pumps, pacemakers and blood-glucose monitors can be tampered with by criminals. 

In Europe, the European Union is currently trying to find methods to ensure the increasing blend between medicine and technology is done properly -- an important issue as the number of people connected to electronic medical 
devices also increases.  Meanwhile, U.S. lawmakers want the GAO to evaluate these security risks, noting that medical devices must operate in a "safe, reliable, and secure manner."



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Just make sure the punishment is a disincentive
By Beenthere on 9/5/2011 4:05:42 PM , Rating: 2
20 years in the slammer should be the minimum for hacking medical devices. If a person dies then life in prison or the death penalty should be mandatory.

Punishment is meant to be a disincentive. It won't stop all morons, but it will properly punish them.




By Warwulf on 9/5/2011 5:34:17 PM , Rating: 2
Such a law would not work...

It would only be used by large corporations to imprison hackers who try to run an open source firmware on those devices. Granted, I don't know what usefulness having such firmware could possibly have.

Maybe a mobile webserver made out of your pacemaker?


By Beenthere on 9/5/2011 7:07:38 PM , Rating: 2
We live in a world full of sick people who like to cause damage to other people or their property. Corp. are not the ones you need to worry about with medical devices, hackers are.

The law/punishment is intended to deter but you can't stop all stupidity...


RE: Just make sure the punishment is a disincentive
By Noya on 9/5/2011 8:52:40 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
We live in a world full of sick people who like to cause damage to other people or their property. Corp. are always the ones you need to worry about with everything from deadly recalled medications pushed through the FDA, corn ethanol in your fuel, to the lobbyists paying off your congressmen so Comcast/ATT/etc. can fuck you in the ass even harder . The law/punishment is intended to deter but you can't stop all stupidity...


There, I fixed it for you.


By Beenthere on 9/5/2011 9:05:53 PM , Rating: 2
There are many wrongs in this world but that's a different discussion. I'm concerned about scumbag hackers who are bored and looking to cause havoc.


By tastyratz on 9/6/2011 3:02:15 PM , Rating: 2
good plan.
While we are at it, we should put in a copyright czar and enforce astronomical fines for copying music. That should be disincentive...
oh wait.


Wireless Pumps
By PuckVader on 9/5/2011 11:37:48 AM , Rating: 2
For those outside of the IT/Healthcare field, wireless pumps offer increased safety through continual monitoring of drip rates and, if configured for, automatic checking of rates being set against the providers order or the (best practice) orderset values. This is 'relatively' new technology. It's up to the manufacture to configure the wireless to be secure and this knowledge of hacking capability should spur innovation attention to wireless security in all clinical areas utilzing wireless technology.




By Meyerstein Consulting Ltd on 9/7/2011 5:31:19 AM , Rating: 2
If my life or that of my loved ones depended on the use of such technology, I would want it to be properly secured. Neither the writers of the article, nor Medtronic, seem to have considered the realistic range of possible attackers. This is not just weirdo bedroom-hackers, but it should also include extortionists, political activists and assassins, the latter of whom could be “agents” of some kind. Those groups could have considerable expertise at their disposal. For IP-connected M2M devices, there is also the possibility of infection by viruses which are generally doing the rounds of the Internet and not targeted at any specific device or person. ETSI (www.etsi.org) have taken all this into account in their M2M (machine-to-machine) specifications. See TR 103 167 which describes threats and countermeasures, taking into account a range of attackers with different skill-sets.




Wireless controls?
By FastEddieLB on 9/5/11, Rating: -1
RE: Wireless controls?
By idiot77 on 9/5/2011 2:29:09 AM , Rating: 2
They use wireless to interrogate the device and change settings.

You want to have a physical wire jammed into you every time they need to check the battery on your pace maker or other implanted device? How about to make small tweaks and changes over time? Or how early warning failure systems not actually doing anything until they physically connect it.

Shy of someone trying to assassinate you, microwaves will still pose a bigger threat. This is one of those stupid hair of fire moments in politics because this will distract anyone from fixing actual policy problems. We have plenty of those, but they're "hard."


RE: Wireless controls?
By Chadder007 on 9/5/2011 8:43:16 AM , Rating: 2
Nothing that uses Wireless is truely "secure".


RE: Wireless controls?
By BSquared on 9/6/2011 6:19:13 AM , Rating: 2
I have an ICD, and if it wasn't for wireless I'd have to have my implant removed for inspection every 6 months, or physically probed. It sits under my pectoral muscle, I doubt the costs to cut it out, and the scarring involved would be worth it. The battery lasts ~7 years, and during that time, it never has to be physically removed. I will say the range on the wireless is small, within 2 meters or so, and the initial interrogation to get it to start transmitting requires a device to be placed over my chest before it will broadcast. The wireless is also convenient in that I can have my home unit activate my implant and send my telemetry to my doctor to be analyzed, as well as if my ICD see's irregularities, they can adjust it without removing the implant just by reconfiguring it over the wireless. That is why it is worth it to have the wireless, otherwise I'd be swamped in medical bills for the constant tinkering with the damn thing.


“And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. I don't even get it. What are they trying to say?” -- Bill Gates on the Mac ads














botimage
Copyright 2013 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki