There is a problem with the Internet of Things: It's incredibly insecure.

This is not a problem that is inherent to the idea of smart devices. Wearables, smart houses, and fitness tracking apps can be made secure -- or at least more secure than they currently are.

The problem, instead, is one that largely has been created by the companies that make IoT devices. Many of these devices are manufactured by relatively small, relatively new companies with little expertise when it comes to cybersecurity. Even large companies, however, and even those that produce thousands of hackable smart TVs a year, cannot be forgiven so easily.

In truth, when it comes to the Internet of Things, many companies have prioritized connectivity and "innovation" (read popular but insecure features) over cybersecurity.

These approaches have led to a variety of security vulnerabilities in IoT devices.

Insufficient Testing and Updating

Perhaps the biggest problem when it comes to the cybersecurity of IoT devices is that many companies simply don't support them after release. In fact, many IoT devices don't even have the capability of being updated, even against the most common types of cyberattack.

This means that even a device that was secure when it was released quickly can become highly vulnerable. Manufacturers often are more focused on releasing their new device than on spending time to patch "historic" security flaws. This attitude can leave these devices in a permanently insecure state.

Failing to update these devices is a huge problem -- and not just for consumers who have their data stolen. It also means that a company's devices can fall victim to a single, large cyberattack that could ruin their reputation, and erase their profitability.

The Solutions

The actions of individual companies or individual consumers are not going to solve this problem, however. Instead, there needs to be a paradigm shift in the industry. It's telling that no (respectable) company would sell, say, time tracking software without committing to keeping it updated. There is no reason this idea is not equally absurd when it comes to physical devices.

Indeed, many of the problems mentioned here -- the use of default passwords, or a careless approach to app permissions -- were overcome long ago in relation to traditional software. What is required, then, might only be a common-sense approach to locking down IoT devices.