We live in an interconnected age where wirelessly controlled computing devices make almost every aspect of our lives easier.

But they are also making us vulnerable to cyber-security attacks.

Today, nearly everything can be hacked, from cars to lightbulbs. But perhaps the most concerning threat is the one posed by brain implants.

Writing for The Conversation, Laurie Pycroft a PhD candidate at the University of Oxford discusses how hackers could someday remotely control humans by taking over these devices.

Scroll down for video

Laurie Pycroft a PhD candidate at the University of Oxford says people need to be prepared for a new era in 'brainjacking', which cyber criminals gain access to medical implants (stock image used)

Experts have demonstrated the ease with which security on pacemakers and insulin pumps can be breached, potentially resulting in lethal consequences.

In a recent paper that I and several of my colleagues at Oxford Functional Neurosurgery wrote, we discussed a new frontier of security threat: brain implants.

Unauthorised control of brain implants, or 'brainjacking', has been discussed in science fiction for decades.

But with advances in implant technology it is now starting to become possible.

The most common type of brain implant is the deep brain stimulation (DBS) system.

A sophisticated attacker could potentially even induce behavioural changes such as hypersexuality or pathological gambling, or even exert a limited form of control over the patient's behaviour by stimulating parts of the brain involved with reward learning

It consists of implanted electrodes positioned deep inside the brain connected to wires running under the skin, which carry signals from an implanted stimulator.

WE COULD ALL SOMEDAY HAVE BRAIN IMPLANTS Presidential candidate Zoltan Istvan believe that in a few decades, we could all be plugged into an AI 'matrix' using brain implants. 'Eventually, this type of technology will allow us to be connected 24/7 to the internet and on social media,' he told MailOnline. 'This is the beginning of the hive mind, where everyone is interconnected to one another.' The technology works by using the basics of electroencephalogram (EEG), which can read electrical signals produced by the brain. 'But it will also have technology that can stimulate your brain back, likely through tiny electrical signals it can administer, that allows one to "feel" what the device's input is,' said Istvan. 'If a machine creates this input, then true communication with a machine - or AI -in this case has been created.' 'It's rudimentary right now, but in 5 or 10 years, this type of technology could become widespread.' Advertisement

The stimulator consists of a battery, a small processor, and a wireless communication antenna that allows doctors to program it.

In essence, it functions much like a cardiac pacemaker, with the main distinction being that it directly interfaces with the brain.

DBS is a fantastic tool for treating a wide range of disorders.

It is most widely used to treat Parkinson's disease, often with dramatic results (see video below), but it is also used to treat dystonia (muscle spasms), essential tremor and severe chronic pain.

It is also being trialled for conditions such as depression and Tourette's syndrome.

Targeting different brain regions with different stimulation parameters gives neurosurgeons increasingly precise control over the human brain, allowing them to alleviate distressing symptoms.

However, this precise control of the brain, coupled with the wireless control of stimulators, also opens an opportunity for malicious attackers to go beyond the more straightforward harms that could come with controlling insulin pumps or cardiac implants, into a realm of deeply troubling attacks.

Examples of possible attacks include altering stimulation settings so that patients with chronic pain are caused even greater pain than they would experience without stimulation.

Or a Parkinson's patient could have their ability to move inhibited.

A sophisticated attacker could potentially even induce behavioural changes such as hypersexuality or pathological gambling, or even exert a limited form of control over the patient's behaviour by stimulating parts of the brain involved with reward learning in order to reinforce certain actions.

Although these hacks would be difficult to achieve as they would require a high level of technological competence and the ability to monitor the victim, a sufficiently determined attacker could manage it.

There are proposed solutions to making implants more resistant to cyber-attacks, but makers of these devices are in a difficult position when trying to implement security features.

There's a trade off between designing a system with perfect security and a system that is actually usable in the real world.

Implants are heavily constrained by physical size and battery capacity, making many designs unfeasible.

These devices must be easily accessible to medical staff in an emergency, meaning that some form of 'back-door' control is almost a necessity.

Examples of possible attacks include altering stimulation settings so that patients with chronic pain are caused even greater pain than they would experience without stimulation

New and exciting features, such as being able to control implants using a smartphone or over the internet, have to be balanced against the increased risk that such features can provide.

Brain implants are becoming more common.

As they get approved for treating more diseases, become cheaper, and get more features, increasing numbers of patients will be implanted with them.

This is a good thing overall but, just as a more complex and interconnected internet resulted in greater cyber-security risks, more advanced and widespread brain implants will pose tempting targets to criminals.

Consider what a terrorist could do with access to a politician's mind or how coercive blackmail would be if someone could alter how you act and think.

These are scenarios that are unlikely to remain purely in the realm of science fiction for much longer.

It's important to note that there's no evidence to suggest that any of these implants has been subjected to such a cyber-attack in the real world, nor that patients with them currently implanted should be afraid.

Still, this is an issue that device makers, regulators, scientists, engineers and clinicians all need to consider before they become a reality.