The Internet of criminal things

As was already pointed out in another sub-thread, the ability to modify and the certification for use of public infrastructure are two different things that should be kept separate from a regulatory perspective. Right now the concept already exists of modification that make a car no longer street-legal, why should software be treated any differently than hardware, when the ultimate effect is the same? Also, if I do modify software and it doesn't cause any problems, is there really enough reason for the state to spend resources mandating draconian security systems to prevent modification by the owner. The public interest in my car ends with safety on the public roads and pollution of the public air, beyond that what I do is my business, especially on private property.

I'm strongly for security and systems defending themselves from unauthorized remote modification, but the owner should always technically authorized to modify, even to the point of dropping warranty support or regulatory compliance.