Reply to post: Re: Anoher obvious solution

Um, excuse me. Do you have clearance to patch that MRI scanner?

jelabarre59

Re: Anoher obvious solution

Yes, because there's no way that you need to be able to link an MRI scan or a clinical chemistry record to the patient that the results refer to.

The potentially-insecure device should only have a "transaction record" number. Send the device the parameters it needs, along with the transaction number. After the scan/procedure, send the corresponding data back up to your data storage, where a secured and regularly re-evaluated system connects the raw scan data to the patient record. You my need a *secured* terminal for the device operator to confirm the data and the patient are properly matched, but this in no way needs to be connected to the insecured device.

I also expect this equipment should not be connected full-time. Burst transmissions should be adequate; receive the parameters in one burst, send results back in another burst. Firmware updates done with a laptop, checked for cleanliness/security before being brought to the device to be updated, with the device's "burst network" disabled. The less time equipment spends connected, the less chance of vulnerabilities being exploited.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon