In this revision, @Aegean Blue Sea: added this unsourced description of "Hazardware", considerably copy-edited by me:
- Prof Sean S. Costigan and Dr Dinos A. Kerigan-Kyrou (of the Partnership for Peace Consortium and the Marshall Center) have proposed the concept of "Hazardware". This refers to apps and IoT devices given authorization by a user who does not understand the scope or consequences. For example, a messaging app on a phone is likely to require permission to access the user's microphone and camera. The user may assume that the app will only access the microphone or camera when they make a voice or video call or take a photo. However, their permission allows the app to access the camera and microphone at any time. The security implications of Hazardware are substantial for military and business organisations and particularly the user of the app or device.
@Bruce1ee: reverted this with Twinkle saying please provide a source, which I thought might be a little abrupt and discouraging: on the one hand this article does seem to attract low-quality and dubious additions, but on the other, the topics of IoT and user understanding seem relevant but are barely touched on here. I found the probable source of this contribution at the sometimes criticised site academia.edu.[1]
As I write the authors are unknown to Wikipedia. Dinos A. Kerigan-Kyrou
I could not read the publication¿s? without registering, which I was reluctant to do, given Academia.edu § Criticism and the conflicting ratings by Web of Trust users, but I imagine it is probably bona fide.
The term "hazardware" was not found by the authors' organisations' sites' search functions,[2], so the connection seems uncertain.
Searching the internet for "hazardware", I only found the above revision of this article, the above paper¿s? and other meanings such as a dodgy assembly of components[3].
Can we not nonetheless make use of the above ideas?
PJTraill (talk) 10:42, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
References
(Please note criticisms of site) Possible duplicates – the only difference appears to be the number and the presence of ". By"
- Certainly we can make use of the above ideas, provided they can be backup up with reliable sources. I also did a quick search for "hazardware" and not much that could be considered reliable came up. You're right, I may have been "a little abrupt and discouraging", but the edit come across as original research, and this article does tend to be a magnet for dubious additions. —Bruce1eetalk 13:28, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
- After my recent changes have just been reverted by User:Aegean Blue Sea I've popped a gentle warning on their talk page. -Snori (talk) 17:25, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
