This is why IoT security is vulnerable. Let's examine in which areas and how security can be exposed and remain vigilant.

There have been cases where refrigerators, which are opened and closed several times a day, vacuum cleaners that sweep through every corner of the house, and TVs that we sit face-to-face to watch have been hacked. In 2014, when IoT security was being discussed, Proof Point, an American security company, revealed that hundreds of thousands of malicious emails were being sent three times a day not only to businesses and individuals but also to home appliances. The level of hacking went beyond simply receiving emails; it was now possible to control the cameras attached to these devices. Cameras on vacuum cleaners and TVs could become the eyes of hackers, filming every corner of the house.

What about a smart factory that uses sensors to detect the lower levels of the plant, assess the current situation, and even halt operations if problems arise? While it can increase factory availability and enhance convenience through real-time management, it also presents a wide range of threats. Local Area Networks are susceptible to Denial of Service (DOS) attacks, data leakage, and command tampering. Gateway segments allow unauthorized personnel to remotely control the facility or eavesdrop on data. These issues stem from various problems, such as insufficient security coding during application installation and errors arising from the diverse product manufacturing processes.

To date, hacking incidents have predominantly resulted from a lack of awareness among internal factory personnel. The German Federal Office for Information Security suffered losses when the blast furnace control system at a German steel plant was attacked. At the time, hackers stole login accounts using the email addresses of officials and seized control of the process control system. A security official attending an IoT security forum stated for the same reason, “There have been cases where domestic companies have had corporate know-how leaked due to hacking, but they have not disclosed it publicly.”
Autonomous vehicle sensors lack the situational adaptability of the human eye and can misidentify objects. Professor Yongdae Kim of KAIST, who researched actual threat factors, stated that sensors from Google's Velodyne and Mobileye can also use bright lasers to render objects invisible, and that sensors can even be used to induce hallucinations, making it appear as if objects are present when they are not.

Professor Kim stated that he caused the drone to fall by controlling the MEMS through resonance sent to the gyroscope, which determines the drone's speed. The accompanying video showed a drone experiment in which it fell when a MEMS signal was sent while it was flying well, and then took flight again when the signal was stopped. The video of a drone falling while flying is similar to footage released on YouTube by an American security consultant in 2015. However, the security consultant reported that they were able to hack 'AR. Drone' because the drone used unencrypted Wi-Fi and its SSID was not hidden.

Cases of damage caused by drone hacking have primarily occurred in the United States, a country with vast land and advanced military training. In some instances, information captured by the U.S. military was leaked as is, while others hijacked "state-of-the-art" drones by hacking them to change their destinations. The acquired drones were even disassembled and reverse-engineered for development.