And please don’t assume we are not all professionals in any given field... or don’t work closely with security professionals on an extremely regular basis.
Sorry, your posts seem more on the gaslighting side of the spectrum now.
I'm a security professional for critical infrastructure and digital assets. Been doing this type of work for about 30 years. Started out doing it in the military and later for oil majors. Layered security in general is a good approach. We fend off about 12,000 attacks a day including a constant barrage from two distinct apt's. Even with huge companies we realize there is a threat tier and tailor solutions to meet the threat. What is happening currently, what has happened in the past, what is expected in the near future, and what is possible.
If you feel that a network penetration is an imminent threat then by all means address it. Given the current vulnerabilities with zwave, SO isn't going to provide any meaningful protection and does create a noticable amount of traffic. You're much better just isolating the hub from your main network and call it a day.
The required knowledge and physical proximity needed to execute any of the current vulnerabilities in my opinion don't warrant much time. Time better spent showing them how to safely operate a firearm and what scammer calls look like and how to avoid falling prey to them.
I think the reason you've had issues on this forum about this subject is because a lot of us see the possible vulnerabilities and attack vectors and realize just how unlikely they are. I'd probably get hit by lightning twice before someone hacked my zwave network.
Here's my public ip 75.26.205.78. I'll PayPal ya 1000 bucks if you can turn on my sprinklers via hacking my zwave.
I'm with Lewis on this one. Security and convenience do NOT go hand in hand. We are talking about home automation here...not home security. That cute zwave/zigbee/bluetooth deadbolt on your door isn't security, it's convenience.
I don't think you'll find any disagreement over that point.
The claim, by @endorphin_junkie, being questioned was whether the use of z-wave devices (in particular) provided an easily hackable method of intrusion. And that such intrusions were commonplace and already the subject of police investigations.
Maybe I am misunderstanding something but it seems to me that security and convenience absolutely go together. The more inconvenient the security scheme the more dangerous workarounds will be done by the users thereby reducing security and/or reducing productivity (or WAF/PAF).
You do have to balance convenience with security in order to accomplish your goals otherwise how would you be able to implement anything in a relatively safe but useful way? Seems like convenience is/should be an important security consideration.
In this case unsecured Z-Wave doesn't seem like a big issue given the various factors already discussed. Although a (weak) counter argument is it is still a potential 'vector' that could be exploited.. but whats the cost/reward benefit?
Although the problem is it is a never ending process not a fixed decision. In a perfect world (haha) the more critical the security the more frequent the review...
I feel sorry for you if you actually got in. My system monitors attacks and honeypot will actually cripple your device and infect your network with some pretty nasty stuff.
Malicious honeypots are pretty common. Imo, if your good enough to get in my network you're probably good enough to realize what just happened once you got in and probably won't try again.