What is Digg?Sponsored by newegg
Ready. Set. Shop view!
newegg.com - Newegg.com Black Friday Sale starting 11/25 3PM PST. No Lines, No Crowds, Click and Save.
48 Comments
- Vecta1, on 11/11/2009, -1/+60It would take a really twisted mind to hack a pacemaker.
- nmffffd9, on 11/11/2009, -2/+52if you want to ***** with someone's pacemaker you deserve to burn in hell
- minidiez, on 11/11/2009, -1/+34Have you no heart?
- Xaevier, on 11/12/2009, -2/+25I just installed AVG on my pacemaker and I haven't had any issues.
- captininsanity, on 11/12/2009, -0/+20As long as you don't install Norton.
We have stopped your heart from preforming a potentially dangerous action... - baitzy, on 11/12/2009, -0/+9It's for quick access changes when necessary. You certainly don't want a port... that's just asking for infection.
- baitzy, on 11/12/2009, -0/+9Pacemakers aren't just for the elderly, I've got one at 26.
- 0tis, on 11/12/2009, -0/+9There's a psychological issue, too. Nobody wants to look at themselves in the mirror and think "Hey, USB 2.0. Sexy!"
- jdeane, on 11/12/2009, -3/+11"...come equipped with wireless communication systems..."
How about not doing that? Use a closed system (with a physical connection to a port that is "mounted" on the skin when measurements and changes need to be made). Or is this not possible? - joshmoney, on 11/12/2009, -1/+8Angio-Virus Guard?
- marciot, on 11/12/2009, -0/+7Great, now humans will get heart worms too...
...and heart trojans, and heart spyware... - anoriginalname, on 11/12/2009, -0/+7you could get heating issues (i.e. burning). The point isn't laziness, it has an actual function
- captininsanity, on 11/12/2009, -2/+9Perhaps for ransom? (con artists love taking advantage of the elderly)
I really hope no one would do this for the lulz... - LifeVirusZERO, on 11/12/2009, -1/+7Coming Next week:
Norton 2010 Pacemaker Edition! - inactive, on 11/12/2009, -0/+5It's sad that this is an issue
- FlyingSquidwolf, on 11/12/2009, -1/+6pwn123 wants to connect to your Pacemaker. CANCEL or ALLOW?
- copypastry, on 11/12/2009, -0/+3Suddenly electrocardiograms all around the country start displaying "0wn3d" instead of a normal heart rhythm.
- inactive, on 11/12/2009, -3/+6So what would that be, a Heart A-hack?
- GorfTron, on 11/12/2009, -1/+4This makes my atheist ass want a hell for some people.
- GrandZooby, on 11/12/2009, -0/+2No - that's exactly what I was questioning. Did you read the article or what I wrote? The article talked about how the pacemaker would allow different access based on whether the transceiver it was communicating with was within 30 cm or more than 10m.
Given two transceivers along the same azimuth from the pacemaker, how could it tell the distance to each transceiver, especially if their apparent signal strength was the same (the farther one was stronger)?
And you're right, you'd need at LEAST 2 points to get a distance; 3 would be better. And while I don't know much about pacemakers, I imagine they are indeed quite small. Given the relatively large wavelengths involved, I'm wondering how they propose a pacemaker could be large enough to this distance sensing.
I image in theory you could do something based on the assumption that as long as the heart is beating, the body would be moving in at least tiny amounts relative to the transceiver and could then get a time-series set of points to do a triangulation. But again, that motion would have to be enough to compensate for the wavelengths and now you would need very sophisticated capabilities for capturing and analyzing that data. While it might be possible to do, I'm not sure it fits within the budget of space and power available to a tiny pacemaker.
I then proposed that a simpler solution would be to separate the data/performance transmission capability from the control-system of the pacemaker. Allow it to transmit data about how things are going, but require a more traditional physical connection to actually adjust the programming of the pacemaker.
So, no, I'm not a troll, though I'm probably stupid enough. I just don't see, and the article was light on information, how a pacemaker could accomplish the key bit of security they talked about. The article seems more like a bit of scaremongering looking for a "scary threat", regardless of the plausibility of the threat. Or maybe a very complex solution looking to solve a problem that could much more easily be prevented from being a problem in the first place. - SaladCactusKing, on 11/12/2009, -0/+2Hacking pacemakers? That's some KGB Black Ops *****.
- kalibur, on 11/12/2009, -0/+2If you turn off a pacemaker you aren't a hacker, you're a murderer. BIG DIFFERENCE!
- jsffive, on 11/12/2009, -0/+2That's just absolutely hideous.
- sugarazor, on 11/12/2009, -0/+2Exactly, that was my first reaction when I read the headline: "Here's how you prevent it... don't hook a ***** pacemaker up to the internet!" Jesus Christ, there are just some things that don't need to be hooked up to the internet, like refrigerators and ya know... someone's life!
- SFIndian83, on 11/12/2009, -2/+4Logged in just to digg you up.
- palehorse864, on 11/12/2009, -0/+2Interesting, who made your shirt? Van Heusen? Versacci?
Nope... Faraday! - captininsanity, on 11/12/2009, -0/+1@WELLDOITLIVE You have no idea what a pacemaker does do you...
It's for fixing heart beats that aren't in proper beat. This often shows up in old people, but some people are born with it. McDonalds will cause heart disease, but not make you need a pacemaker... - allodude, on 11/12/2009, -0/+1What a heart breaker.
- joshmoney, on 11/12/2009, -1/+2Every time I think that I've come to a place, where I can finally say that I no longer support the death penalty, some sick deviant finds a way to make me change my mind.
- ubermensch00, on 11/12/2009, -1/+2anyone know which government officials rely on pacemakers?
- Tarkaan, on 11/12/2009, -1/+2I was gonna say "inb4 /b/" but I was not.
- FlyingSquidwolf, on 11/12/2009, -0/+1*insert Firefly quote here*
- 0tis, on 11/12/2009, -0/+1He actually said "if the pacemaker had more than one antenna...." and then went on to say why that wasn't feasible.
- 0tis, on 11/12/2009, -0/+1"Achey breakey heart"
- palehorse864, on 11/12/2009, -0/+1Someone should have told myspace and facebook that a long time ago.
- PirateD00D, on 11/13/2009, -0/+1Pretty sure you can build a HERF and just take out all the electronics in the hospital.
- sodade, on 11/12/2009, -0/+1Mwhaha - now we have a path to legalization! Hack enough oldster's pacemakers and eventually we'll get rid of all those people who are still full up on the government's programming that cannabis=a dangerous drug.
- JohnnySoftware, on 11/16/2009, -0/+1You want a port with a hole in your skin exposed to the outside world. It it hardly ideal.
- Leopards, on 11/12/2009, -0/+1I think I remember reading a novel were the hitman used the method of de-activating the targets pacemaker to kill him! So Reality is catching up with fiction again!
- JohnnySoftware, on 11/16/2009, -0/+1People have been shiining lasers in strangers eyes in cities for a decade and in the past few years they have moved on to shining lasers in jet airline pilots eyes when they are attempting to land the plane.
Fortunately, courts are locking people up for years for this now. Courts shouldn't have to be bothered with this. They should just make it 400 counts of attempted murder - or however many people are on the airliner. - JackOpfor, on 11/12/2009, -0/+1The wireless range on these devices is really short. You practically have to put the control unit within 2 inches of the implanted device to be able to reprogram them. Although metal detectors still do cause problems with some of these sort of devices.
Yeah USB 2.0 is so not hot.... but a Gold plated FireWire jack is SEXY! Or one of those Macbook style magnetic power plugs cause it would really suck to have a plug yanked out of your neck. - motoroats, on 11/12/2009, -0/+0How can I subscribe to your newsletter?
- Hilyin, on 11/12/2009, -1/+1Why not require encrypted ssh connection? heh.
- morcheeba, on 11/12/2009, -2/+1Sounds like a made-up threat. Sure, these things need security measures, but until there is evidence of at least two people tampering with pacemakers, please don't use the plural term "heart hackers".
- WELLDOITLIVE, on 11/12/2009, -2/+1Stop eating mcdonald's
- GrandZooby, on 11/12/2009, -4/+2I'm no RF engineer, but how is a a pace-maker supposed to be able to tell the distance between it and another transceiver? It seems a weak nearby transceiver would be indistinguishable from a strong farther away transceiver. I suppose it could triangulate if the pacemaker had more than one antenna, but with about a 12 cm wavelength, wouldn't the antenna need to be at least 3 cm apart (quarter wavelength) have even the remotest chance of doing this?
I think if it were up to me, I'd rather have a wired interface to any part of it that can actually control the operation and programming of the pacemaker. I don't see a problem, though, with it having the ability to transmit performance data wirelessly. That just needs to be completely isolated from the control mechanism.
This seems like sensationalism and scare-mongering to me. - txballer, on 11/12/2009, -4/+2I'd do it for the lulz. DESU! DESU! *sigh* I'm still stuck in 2007.
- breadfred, on 11/12/2009, -3/+1This is a pacemaker we are talking about. A tiny thing, really robust. Not much space for distance sensing. Let alone triangulation, for which you need at least 2 different measuring points. Are you a troll or just plain stupid?
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is