You don’t need printer security
So there's this tweet:The guy at the HP printer security booth seriously told a customer that he needs print security "because stuxnet exploits the print spooler" pic.twitter.com/WRyfEGj9hR— Jake Williams (@MalwareJake) February 15, 2017
What it's probably refering to is this:
This is an obviously bad idea.
Well, not so "obvious", so some people have ask me to clarify the situation. After all, without "security", couldn't a printer just be added to a botnet of IoT devices?
The answer is this:
Fixing insecurity is almost always better than adding a layer of security.Adding security is notoriously problematic, for three reasons
- Hackers are active attackers. When presented with a barrier in front of an insecurity, they'll often find ways around that barrier. It's a common problem with "web application firewalls", for example.
- The security software itself can become a source of vulnerabilities hackers can attack, which has happened frequently in anti-virus and intrusion prevention systems.
- Security features are usually snake-oil, sounding great on paper, with with no details, and no independent evaluation, provided to the public.
It's the last one that's most important. HP markets features, but there's no guarantee they work. In particular, similar features in Continue reading


