IoT, or the Internet of Things, has been in use since circa 1999. It defines a next chapter in the evolution of the Internet where computing devices embedded in everyday objects are able to send and receive data themselves. In recent years miniaturization and economies of scale brought a boon of new devices to the consumer and enterprise market, prompting Gartner to predict over 20bln live IoT devices by 2020. However, the definition of IoT is loose and, for the purpose of predicting trends or discussing security, formulating a clear understanding of the term is crucial. In fact, Internet of Things is a term only mostly used by the media, academia and the industry. Customers in the consumer space refer to the technologies by their benefit describing term of “Smart Home”. A quick analysis of this gap shows how it’s entirely possible no knowledge permeates the business and market worlds because of the incompatible terms used. As more devices, OSes and heterogeneous platforms entrench the concept of a new digital lifestyle, the new “Digital Kingdom” opens its doors to radical disruption, such as the latest massive Mirai and Reaper attacks. Our ability to correctly define the IoT, it’s platforms and components, should lead to better market dynamics and better preparedness, as one can’t secure something that can’t be defined. This paper proposes to further understand the IoT by exploring available definitions, reiterating misuse and equivocal perception, concluding with a more suiting, contemporary definition.

Internet of Things (“IoT”), specifically in the consumer space, describes an environment where consumer devices, connected to the Internet in a smart home, communicate to each other directly or through the cloud. Cheap manufacturing and a fast-growing market brought billions such devices in everyday homes, and consequently new concerns emerged about their security. The complexity added by these new systems, with fragmented in-house hardware and software platforms, have been recently the target of both scrutiny and controversy. When IoT devices get hacked it’s no longer just “script kiddies” and part-time hackers, it’s state actors and national security on the line. Where for PCs there is a robust cybersecurity product market (eg. “antivirus”), the majority of IoT devices in households are designed with little or no regard towards cybersecurity and the typical consumer’s understanding of how to secure these is lacking. Effective ways to safeguard IoT products are bug bounties, programs that offer a financial reward to anyone discovering vulnerabilities, but they are costly and hard to manage, thus usually adopted by more mature companies. All manufacturers can additionally benefit from responsible vulnerability disclosure, or ethical hacking, where researchers attempt to find vulnerabilities for recognition or as a public service. Unfortunately disclosing and coordinating vulnerability research challenges are downplayed. This paper proposes to investigate impact, discuss time considerations, and suggest potential solutions for consumers, companies, and regulators to mitigate and improve IoT vulnerability reporting, fixing and disclosure.