{"id":97914,"date":"2020-01-06T21:01:01","date_gmt":"2020-01-07T05:01:01","guid":{"rendered":"\/blogs\/?p=97914"},"modified":"2025-06-06T01:45:19","modified_gmt":"2025-06-06T08:45:19","slug":"the-tradeoff-between-convenience-and-security-a-balancing-act-for-consumers-and-manufacturers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.mcafee.com\/blogs\/other-blogs\/mcafee-labs\/the-tradeoff-between-convenience-and-security-a-balancing-act-for-consumers-and-manufacturers\/","title":{"rendered":"The Tradeoff Between Convenience and Security \u2013 A Balance for Consumers & Manufacturers"},"content":{"rendered":"

This week McAfee Advanced Threat Research (ATR) published new findings, uncovering security flaws in two popular IoT devices: a connected garage door opener and a \u201csmart\u201d ring, which, amongst many uses, utilizes near field communication (NFC) to open door locks.<\/p>\n

I\u2019d like to use these cases as examples of a growing concern in the area of product security. The industry of consumer devices has seen some positive momentum for security in recent years. For example, just a few years back, nearly every consumer-grade router shipped with a default username and password, which, if left unchanged, represented a serious security concern for home networks. At a minimum, most routers at least now ship with a unique password printed on the physical device itself, dramatically increasing the overall network security. Despite positive changes such as this, there is a long way to go.<\/p>\n

If we think about the history of garage doors, they began as a completely manual object, requiring the owner to lift or operate it physically. The first overhead garage door was invented in the early 1920s, and an electric version came to market just a few years later. While this improved the functionality of the device and allowed for \u201cremote\u201d entry, it wasn\u2019t until many years later that an actual wireless remote was added, giving consumers the ability to allow wireless access into their home. This was the beginning of an interesting tradeoff for consumers \u2013 an obvious increase in convenience which introduced a potential new security concern.<\/p>\n

The same concept applies to the front door. Most consumers still utilize physical keys to secure the front door to their homes. However, the introduction of NFC enabled home door locks, which can be opened using compatible smart rings, adds both convenience and potentially compromised security.<\/p>\n

For example, upon investigating the McLear NFC Ring, McAfee ATR uncovered a design insecurity, which could allow an attacker to easily clone the NFC Ring and gain entry to a home utilizing an NFC enabled smart lock.<\/p>\n

While the NFC Ring modernizes physical household security, the convenience that comes with technology implementation also introduces a security issue.<\/p>\n

The issue here is at a higher level; where and when do we draw the line for convenience versus security? The numerous benefits technology enhancements bring are exciting and often highly valuable; but many are unaware of the lengths cyber criminals will go to (for example, we once uncovered a vulnerability in a coffee pot which we were able to leverage to gain access to a home Wi-Fi network<\/a>) and the many ways new features can reduce the security of a system.<\/p>\n

As we move towards automation and remote access to nearly every computerized system on the planet, it\u2019s our shared responsibility to maintain awareness of this fact and demand a higher bar for the products that we buy.<\/p>\n

So what can be done? The responsibility is shared between consumers and manufacturers, and there are a few options:<\/p>\n

For consumers:<\/h2>\n