The Reality of IoT Security Certification Revealed by the National Assembly Audit — And How to Prepare for “Post-Certification” Security
Contents
“Certification should not be the end — it must be the beginning.”
During the 2025 parliamentary audit conducted by the Science, ICT, Broadcasting, and Communications Committee of the Korean National Assembly, the lack of practical effectiveness in the domestic IoT security certification system was officially identified.
There are approximately 3,000 IoT manufacturing and service companies in Korea. However, only 13 companies applied for IoT security certification in 2025. Compared to 33 companies that pursued certification in 2024, this represents less than half the previous figure.
As of the 2025 audit, the certification process is operated under a voluntary application system, and the cost can reach up to KRW 20 million. Additionally, for many small and medium-sized manufacturers lacking resources and personnel for technical documentation, the process imposes a significant burden.
It was also noted that there has not been a single case where an export product obtained Korean IoT security certification.
In other words, the certification system exists, but an “implementation gap” continues to persist in real industrial practice.
Why IoT Security Certification Matters
IoT products operate within the core infrastructure of daily life and industries — including households, factories, medical systems, and vehicles.
A minor vulnerability may lead to data leakage, system compromise, or personal information exposure if security is insufficient.
During the audit, the case of a Chinese-manufactured robot vacuum cleaner was cited. Due to its embedded camera, microphone, and Bluetooth modules, concerns were raised regarding the possibility of internal data being transmitted externally.
Furthermore, under Article 35 of China’s Data Security Law, data stored within China may not be provided to foreign judicial or enforcement agencies without prior approval from the Chinese government. This poses data sovereignty risks even for Korean end users.
📍 Security is no longer optional — it is now the minimum threshold for market credibility.
*China’s Data Security Law, Article 35: Restricts the provision of data stored within China to foreign judicial or law enforcement authorities without authorization from Chinese authorities.
Why Companies Avoid Certification
Cost Burden : Certification expenses range from KRW 6 million to KRW 20 million
Lack of Security Expertise : Most SMEs do not employ dedicated security personnel
Limited Understanding of Standards : Responding to EN 303 645, NIST 8259, CRA, and other global standards presents challenges
Absence of Post-Certification Management : Lack of structured guidance for updates or revalidation after certification
The primary issue for most companies lies not in obtaining certification, but in the absence of a post-certification maintenance system.
“Security Beyond Certification is Now a Necessity”
Security certification is not a single milestone. It is effective only when sustained by a continuous operational framework.
After a product is launched, new vulnerabilities continue to emerge, requiring ongoing patch management, revalidation, and documentation updates.
This aligns directly with the concept of “Lifecycle Security” emphasized by the Cyber Resilience Act (CRA).
“Security must be maintained across all stages of product planning, design, development, launch, operation, and end-of-life.”
In addition, the CRA introduces the Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure (CVD) framework, requiring manufacturers to collaborate with external researchers, customers, and partners to resolve security issues, and to responsibly disclose vulnerabilities at the appropriate time.
ZIEN’s Approach — Z-IoT: A Platform Designed for Post-Certification Security
To address these challenges, ZIEN provides the “Z-IoT,” Intelligent Firmware Security Platform.
Rather than solely supporting certification preparation, Z-IoT enables ongoing security management even after product launch.
AI-based firmware vulnerability detection
Automatically identifies weaknesses across password management, encryption, executable files, and more
Zero-day vulnerability analysis
Detects potential threats using patent-based binary analysis technology
SBOM-driven security
Automatically extracts Open Source components, generates SBOM, and continuously monitors related vulnerabilities
RTOS environment support
Analyzes firmware for both Linux and RTOS-based IoT devices
Global compliance mapping
Automatically correlates security findings with EN 18031, EN 303 645, NIST IR, and other global standards
With Z-IoT, organizations can continuously manage product security post-certification and run automated risk validation after every firmware update.
Conclusion
The issue raised through the National Assembly audit is not the absence of a system, but the absence of an effective lifecycle-based management framework.
To improve overall security maturity, the ability to continuously assess and remediate vulnerabilities after certification is now more critical than the certification process itself.
ZIEN provides the Z-IoT platform together with professional consulting services to help companies maintain product security beyond certification and embed protection across the entire lifecycle.
“IoT security does not stop at certification — this is the direction ZIEN pursues.”
🔗 Inquiry: https://zi-en.io/company/contact-us
