I don't think it's because of this one person, but rather the masses that has crap hardware and software installed everywhere. It's a global problem, not everyone is capable of securing their own network.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Idempotent
> DELETE /idX/delete HTTP/1.1 is idempotent, even if the returned status code may change between requests:
So requesting to open the garage door multiple times which results in an open garage door in the end is an idempotent request, even though after the second request the response is "I am already open!"
Now, a request to toggle the state of the garage door would not be idempotent. The state of the system is different if you call it an odd or even amount of times.
Not quite. If a GET request is side-effect free then it won't be logged (since that is a side effect).
GET requests aren't supposed to modify state. Logging is a side-effect but it isn't usually considered to be stateful. Changing the state (on/off) of a lightbulb is definitely against the standard requirements for a GET request.
Perhaps a better way to express this is that user agents are permitted to turn one GET request into N GET requests (N >= 1), and can also issue GET requests without user interaction (e.g. for preloading). When this happens the system should still meet its (customer / end-user) requirements. The requirements related to logging are that every request is logged, so it makes sense to record each GET request separately. The requirements for the light bulb are that one user interaction (not one GET request) equals one state change, so updating the state in response to each GET request doesn't meet the requirements. Even if the API were explicitly "turn on" or "turn off" rather than "toggle" you still wouldn't want the state to be affected by preloading, and you could get odd results if opposing requests were repeated (interleaved).
Oh, I know! How about a browser that does not allow direct navigation from external to internal addresses? Ah, wait.
It still does not quite work for services that have a public IP address. So where do you go from there, a new protocol that has capability handling and external access is disabled by default?
Forcing companies to issue recalls for buggy hardware and firmware could probably do the trick. Note the expense and the fact of insufficient dissemination of found issues combined with lag to fix them.
In the meantime Google can single handedly monkey patch this situation within a few months and force manufacturers to catch up with the next product cycle. While a less ideal route, this seems far likelier to produce actual results within our lifetimes.
I think it’s because when stuff works it looks simple. There isn’t an obvious difference between a mound of dirt piled up in days and one that’s carefully compacted as it’s constructed. At least until you want to build something on top that actually lasts for 50 years. Build stuff to last takes time and nobody is around to see you succeed.
Back to your point actually fixing the underlying issues with IOT security is worth it long term even if it hypothetically takes 20 years to get it correct. At the same time moving quickly and patching one of 100,000 problems can still be useful.
What are some recent examples? Especially dealing with technology?
I can think of a bunch of counter-examples where the government did not do a good job of regulating:
* Rural broadband failed
* Net neutrality failed
* Healthcare.gov was a fiasco
* Wireless spectrum auction never got us municipal/rural long-range wireless
* NASA's duties have largely been outsourced to private actors
* State DMVs are a shitshow
* Election integrity failed
* They can't figure out what to do about online disinformation
* Warrantless wiretapping: both unconstitutional yet ineffective, as in 9/11 and the lack of data sharing between agencies
* Foreign military misadventures, our traditional forte: Afghanistan, Iraq, both abysmal failures
* Healthcare: a joke compared to every other developed country
* Education: pathetic and getting worse
* Social programs: Welfare, what welfare? inequality and homelessness getting worse every year
* Infrastructure: crumbling
* Clean water: only for rich white people
* Immigration: heh
* Covid: lol
* Renewables: haha
* Nuclear: let's pretend it's not there
On every major policy front, the US government has been a disaster for decades. I'm no libertarian by any stretch, but our government is a complete shitshow compared to any other developed democracy. We have neither the leadership competence (decisionmakers and legislators) nor the engineering talent (career civil servants) who can tackle something as diverse as nuanced as IoT security, or arguably, digital security in general. Give them 20 years and they might be able to catch up to 1990s netsec, and by then the manufacturers will be two decades ahead and foreign intelligence services even further beyond that.
Our government is doomed, and taking us down with it.
Of course it’s all stuff the government does directly like GPS that generally works even if theirs issues with version 1. Go to Healthcare.gov today and it works fine, but wow 8 years ago there where issues. People still get mileage talking about that launch presumably because it’s that unusual.
Bringing up the FTC there’s keeping the wireless spectrum clean. You can blame the Government for not solving all shorts of issues, but people complain while at the same time they largely don’t want state or federal government internet. Healthcare is the same issue, we apparently don’t want even a public option, yet somehow the government is still on the hook.
People are always going to talk up government boondoggles because that’s what’s memorable. Clean water in all 155,693 public water systems in the United States isn’t easy it’s a monumentally difficult task that works 99.9% of the time across a huge range of public and private organizations managed by a huge range of different locations from tiny towns to vast cities. Of course if people actually trusted their water then bottled water would be less popular…
Those things you mentioned aren't recent developments. Yes, there was a time when our government was capable of producing good output. What happened? Why are we still judging today's government by its successes of decades past...? Most of what you mentioned is literally last-century tech. The world has moved on; our government has not.
> You can blame the Government for not solving all shorts of issues, but people complain while at the same time they largely don’t want state or federal government internet.
Maybe there's one class of issues that government can't deliver on because the public mandate isn't quite there yet, like single-payer healthcare. But there's another class of issues that the public DOES want, the government already wrote the laws and allocated the budget for, and then did absolutely nothing about (like rural broadband grants basically going to corrupt telcos, with zero real enforcement). That has nothing to do with the lack of public will, just sheer incompetence and corruption.
Then there's the outright unconstitutional things, like warrantless wiretapping or drone assassinations of US citizens... to say nothing of recent developments, like Roe v Wade.
It's not that our boondoggles our more visible, it's that we fail at providing basic services for a huge portion of the population -- things that most other developed democracies can provide without much issue or controversy. By that measure, we fall far short.
Also when you excluded say Nigeria and in fact most counties then every remaining country is going to seem worse simply because you just arbitrarily raised the standards. It’s not US exceptionalism to simply say few countries or groups of countries have landed anything on Mars which is freaking difficult. Sure, providing great healthcare is more important, but it’s also something very few counties have done well.
In the detracting from success by looking at unrelated failures misses my argument, at best it speeks to the likelihood of success not the possibility.
So what do you think is a fairer way to measure governments? Ratio of important successes to important failures? A matrix of weighted policies and implementation scores?
You'd probably end up with something similar to to the UN's human development index (http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/HDI), in which the US ranks #17, behind Norway, Ireland, Switzerland, Hong Kong, Iceland, Germany, Sweden, Australia, Netherlands, Denmark, Finland, Singapore, the UK, Belgium, New Zealand, and Canada. All of those are perfectly livable countries. My only criterion was "developed democracies", and Hong Kong isn't even much of a democracy anymore. I don't think that's an unreasonably high bar.
Our government is just on the low end of mediocre compared to other developed democracies, at least by the metrics I can think of.
If you can think of a better metric, I'm all ears.