Connect with us

Published

on

Krisanapong Detraphiphat | Moment | Getty Images

John Hultquist, vice president of intelligence analysis at Google-owned cybersecurity firm Mandiant, likens his job to studying criminal minds through a soda straw. He monitors cyberthreat groups in real time on the dark web, watching what amounts to a free market of criminal innovation ebb and flow.

Groups buy and sell services, and one hot idea — a business model for a crime — can take off quickly when people realize that it works to do damage or to get people to pay. Last year, it was ransomware, as criminal hacking groups figured out how to shut down servers through what’s called directed denial of service attacks. But 2022, say experts, may have marked an inflection point due to the rapid proliferation of IoT (Internet of Things) devices.

Attacks are evolving from those that shut down computers or stole data, to include those that could more directly wreak havoc on everyday life. IoT devices can be the entry points for attacks on parts of countries’ critical infrastructure, like electrical grids or pipelines, or they can be the specific targets of criminals, as in the case of cars or medical devices that contain software.

“What I wish is that the vulnerabilities of cybersecurity could never negatively affect human life and infrastructure,” says Meredith Schnur, cyber brokerage leader for US & Canada at Marsh & McLennan, which insures large companies against cyberattacks. “Everything else is just business.”

For the past decade, manufacturers, software companies and consumers have been rushing to the promise of Internet of Things devices. Now there are an estimated 17 billion in the world, from printers to garage door openers, each one packed with software (some of it open-source software) that can be easily hacked. In a conversation Dec. 26 with The Financial Times, Mario Greco, the group CEO of giant insurer Zurich Insurance Group, said cyberattacks could pose a larger threat to insurers than pandemics and climate change, if hackers aim to disrupt lives, rather than merely spying or stealing data.

IoT devices are a key entry point for many attacks, according to Microsoft’s Digital Defense Report 2022. “While the security of IT hardware and software has strengthened in recent years, the security of Internet of Things (IoT) … has not kept pace,” according to the report.

A rash of attacks that reached the physical world through the cyber world in the past year show the rising stakes. Last February, Toyota stopped operations at one of its plants because of a cyberattack. In April, Ukraine’s power grid was targeted. In May, the Port of London was hit with a cyberattack. That followed up on a 2021 that included to major attacks on critical infrastructure in the U.S., taking down energy and food supply operations of Colonial Pipeline and the JBS meatpacking conglomerate.

What many experts are anticipating is the day enterprising criminals or hackers affiliated with a nation-state figure out an easy-to-replicate scheme using IoT devices at scale. A group of criminals, perhaps connected to a foreign government, could figure out how to take control of many things at once – like cars, or medical devices. “We have already seen large-scale attacks using IoT, in the form of IoT botnets. In that case, actors leveraging unpatched vulnerabilities in IoT devices used control of those devices to carry out denial of service attacks against many targets. Those vulnerabilities are found regularly in ubiquitous products that are rarely updated.”

In other words, the possibility already exists. It’s only a question of when a criminal or a nation decides to act in a way that targets the physical world at a large scale. “It’s not always the art of the possible. It’s a market-driven thing,” Hultquist said. “Somebody figures out a scheme that is successful at making money.”

Aside from responding rapidly to attacks, the only answer to the “cat-and-mouse game” is constant innovation, says Shlomo Kramer, an early investor in Palo Alto Networks and currently one of the top cyber security investors worldwide.

There are a handful of companies, new regulatory approaches, a growing focus on cars as a particularly important area, and a new movement within the software engineering world to do a better job of incorporating cybersecurity from the beginning.

Internet of Things has a big update problem

The cybersecurity industry is upping its game. Companies including ForeScout and Phosphorus focus on Internet of Things security, which has a heavy emphasis on constant inventory of “endpoints” – where new devices connect to a network.

But one of the key problems in Internet of Things security is that there isn’t a good process for updating devices with patches, as new vulnerabilities, hacks or attacks are discovered, says Greg Clark, former CEO of Symantec, currently the chairman of Forescout. Many users are accustomed to downloading updates and patches to computers and phones; and even in those cases, a significant number of users don’t bother to do the updates.

The problem is much worse in the IoT: For instance, who bothers to update their garage-door opener? “Not many of the IoT devices have a system to update the code,” says Clark. “It becomes a serious problem to remediate the vulnerabilities in the IoT.”

He said one focus for cybersecurity companies has become putting controls around the devices so they can only do a specific set of things. That way, the devices can’t be weaponized to launch attacks on other networks. “There are a lot of hammers swinging,” Clark said, on products that make the IoT more secure).

Medical devices, which are seen as particularly important and particularly vulnerable, are one focus. Last month, Palo Alto Networks announced a new product aimed at medical device makers.

IoT device makers are not regulated enough

Because the challenges are new, and cut across industries, the U.S. guidelines and regulations remain patchwork. That has left a lot of IoT cybersecurity up to consumers and companies across sectors, rather than the many manufacturers making IoT devices.

“I’m hopeful there will be some new standards, and newer regulations that will force the vendors to do more,” says Randy Trzeciak, director of the science information and security policy & management program at Carnegie Mellon University. “There should be a national discussion around insuring device security, and where the manufacturer needs to take some ownership and responsibility.”

Clark said CISA and the National Institutes of Standards and Technology are working together, issuing guidelines for the thousands of manufacturers that make IoT devices covering such things as ensuring that IoT devices identify themselves to networks as they are added to them. In 2020, the U.S. Congress turned the guidelines into a law, but only for companies that supply the U.S. government with IoT devices. A spokesman for the National Institutes of Standards and Technology says this is the only national law the agency knows of. Some state-specific and industry-specific laws also exist: For instance, data in medical devices would be covered by HIPAA, and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has some jurisdiction over cars.

Some investors and executives cautiously welcome the increasing involvement of regulators. “It’s simply too complex,” Kramer said. “There’s not enough qualified and experienced security people.”

How cars are being targeted

As more criminal hackers aim attacks at the physical sphere, cars are a target. That includes theft, with attackers exploiting the keyless entry systems, but also attacks on sensitive information now being stored in cars, such as maps and credit card data.

Led by the European Union, countries around the world are rapidly adopting cybersecurity regulations for cars, with the EU’s coming into effect in July of last year.

The transition to electric vehicles has created an opportunity for regulators to get ahead of the criminals. As the new technology lowered the barriers to entry, more car companies entered the market. In turn, that has created an opportunity for regulators to work with industry groups that want to protect their home-grown industries.

The concerns about cars are nothing new. In one landmark experiment in 2015, two hackers attacked a Jeep Cherokee. “They shut down the engine on the highway – the brakes didn’t respond. This is not a pleasant situation,” said David Barzilai, CEO of a six-year-old Israeli company called Karamba Security, which helps car companies make their IoT devices more secure.

Barzilai says that in the past 12 months, there were dozens of attacks, both by serious criminal gangs and teen-agers. “When we started six years ago, the attacks were by states, mostly China,” he says. “Within the last 12 months, there’s a democratization” in car attacks, he said, pointing to the case in January 2022 of the teen who figured out how to access the control systems of a few dozen Teslas at once,  last January — have already done.

Connected cars usually have SIM cards, that hackers can attack via cellular networks, he said. “All cars of the same vehicle model use the same software,” he said. “Once hackers identify a vulnerability, and a way to exploit it remotely, they can replicate the attack on other vehicles.” 

Cybersecurity grew as an industry mostly as an after-the-fact attempt to fix software and hardware that was long since on the market, as criminals and foreign governments discovered vulnerabilities in the systems that they could exploit. One study by IBM‘s System Science’s Institute found it costs six times more to fix a cybersecurity vulnerability while software is being implemented than when it is under development. The IoT is still relatively new as an industry, giving security-minded developers a chance to get ahead of the cat-and-mouse game, says Trzeciak, and there’s a growing movement of researchers and developers working on this, including Carnegie Mellon’s Software Engineering Institute’s DevSecOps initiative, which aims to add security into earlier phases of software development. That process-based innovation could make all kinds of software, including that in cars and medical devices, more secure — and therefore, the devices safer.

Continue Reading

Technology

Here are 4 major moments that drove the stock market last week

Published

on

By

Here are 4 major moments that drove the stock market last week

Continue Reading

Technology

Oracle says there have been ‘no delays’ in OpenAI arrangement after stock slide

Published

on

By

Oracle says there have been 'no delays' in OpenAI arrangement after stock slide

Oracle CEO Clay Magouyrk appears on a media tour of the Stargate AI data center in Abilene, Texas, on Sept. 23, 2025.

Kyle Grillot | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Oracle on Friday pushed back against a report that said the company will complete data centers for OpenAI, one of its major customers, in 2028, rather than 2027.

The delay is due to a shortage of labor and materials, according to the Friday report from Bloomberg, which cited unnamed people. Oracle shares fell to a session low of $185.98, down 6.5% from Thursday’s close.

“Site selection and delivery timelines were established in close coordination with OpenAI following execution of the agreement and were jointly agreed,” an Oracle spokesperson said in an email to CNBC. “There have been no delays to any sites required to meet our contractual commitments, and all milestones remain on track.”

The Oracle spokesperson did not specify a timeline for turning on cloud computing infrastructure for OpenAI. In September, OpenAI said it had a partnership with Oracle worth more than $300 billion over the next five years.

“We have a good relationship with OpenAI,” Clay Magouyrk, one of Oracle’s two newly appointed CEOs, said at an October analyst meeting.

Doing business with OpenAI is relatively new to 48-year-old Oracle. Historically, Oracle grew through sales of its database software and business applications. Its cloud infrastructure business now contributes over one-fourth of revenue, although Oracle remains a smaller hyperscaler than Amazon, Microsoft and Google.

OpenAI has also made commitments to other companies as it looks to meet expected capacity needs.

In September, Nvidia said it had signed a letter of intent with OpenAI to deploy at least 10 gigawatts of Nvidia equipment for the San Francisco artificial intelligence startup. The first phase of that project is expected in the second half of 2026.

Nvidia and OpenAI said in a September statement that they “look forward to finalizing the details of this new phase of strategic partnership in the coming weeks.”

But no announcement has come yet.

In a November filing, Nvidia said “there is no assurance that we will enter into definitive agreements with respect to the OpenAI opportunity.”

OpenAI has historically relied on Nvidia graphics processing units to operate ChatGPT and other products, and now it’s also looking at designing custom chips in a collaboration with Broadcom.

On Thursday, Broadcom CEO Hock Tan laid out a timeline for the OpenAI work, which was announced in October. Broadcom and OpenAI said they had signed a term sheet.

“It’s more like 2027, 2028, 2029, 10 gigawatts, that was the OpenAI discussion,” Tan said on Broadcom’s earnings call. “And that’s, I call it, an agreement, an alignment of where we’re headed with respect to a very respected and valued customer, OpenAI. But we do not expect much in 2026.”

OpenAI declined to comment.

WATCH: Oracle says there have been ‘no delays’ in OpenAI arrangement after stock slide

Oracle says there have been 'no delays' in OpenAI arrangement after stock slide

Continue Reading

Technology

AI order from Trump might be ‘illegal,’ Democrats and consumer advocacy groups claim

Published

on

By

AI order from Trump might be ‘illegal,’ Democrats and consumer advocacy groups claim

“This is the wrong approach — and most likely illegal,” Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., said in a post on X Thursday.

“We need a strong federal safety standard, but we should not remove the few protections Americans currently have from the downsides of AI,” Klobuchar said.

Trump’s executive order directs Attorney General Pam Bondi to create a task force to challenge state laws regulating AI.

The Commerce Department was also directed to identify “onerous” state regulations aimed at AI.

The order is a win for tech companies such as OpenAI and Google and the venture firm Andreessen Horowitz, which have all lobbied against state regulations they view as burdensome. 

It follows a push by some Republicans in Congress to impose a moratorium on state AI laws. A recent plan to tack on that moratorium to the National Defense Authorization Act was scuttled.

Collin McCune, head of government affairs at Andreessen Horowitz, celebrated Trump’s order, calling it “an important first step” to boost American competition and innovation. But McCune urged Congress to codify a national AI framework.

“States have an important role in addressing harms and protecting people, but they can’t provide the long-term clarity or national direction that only Congress can deliver,” McCune said in a statement.

Sriram Krishnan, a White House AI advisor and former general partner at Andreessen Horowitz, during an interview Friday on CNBC’s “Squawk Box,” said that Trump is was looking to partner with Congress to pass such legislation.

“The White House is now taking a firm stance where we want to push back on ‘doomer’ laws that exist in a bunch of states around the country,” Krishnan said.

He also said that the goal of the executive order is to give the White House tools to go after state laws that it believes make America less competitive, such as recently passed legislation in Democratic-led states like California and Colorado.

The White House will not use the executive order to target state laws that protect the safety of children, Krishnan said.

Robert Weissman, co-president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, called Trump’s order “mostly bluster” and said the president “cannot unilaterally preempt state law.”

“We expect the EO to be challenged in court and defeated,” Weissman said in a statement. “In the meantime, states should continue their efforts to protect their residents from the mounting dangers of unregulated AI.”

Weissman said about the order, “This reward to Big Tech is a disgraceful invitation to reckless behavior
by the world’s largest corporations and a complete override of the federalist principles that Trump and MAGA claim to venerate.”

In the short term, the order could affect a handful of states that have already passed legislation targeting AI. The order says that states whose laws are considered onerous could lose federal funding.

One Colorado law, set to take effect in June, will require AI developers to protect consumers from reasonably foreseeable risks of algorithmic discrimination.

Some say Trump’s order will have no real impact on that law or other state regulations.

“I’m pretty much ignoring it, because an executive order cannot tell a state what to do,” said Colorado state Rep. Brianna Titone, a Democrat who co-sponsored the anti-discrimination law.

In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom recently signed a law that, starting in January, will require major AI companies to publicly disclose their safety protocols. 

That law’s author, state Sen. Scott Wiener, said that Trump’s stated goal of having the United States dominate the AI sector is undercut by his recent moves. 

“Of course, he just authorized chip sales to China & Saudi Arabia: the exact opposite of ensuring U.S. dominance,” Wiener wrote in an X post on Thursday night. The Bay Area Democrat is seeking to succeed Speaker-emerita Nancy Pelosi in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Trump on Monday said he will Nvidia to sell its advanced H200 chips to “approved customers” in China, provided that U.S. gets a 25% cut of revenues.

Continue Reading

Trending