fenderman
Staff member
- Mar 9, 2014
- 36,892
- 21,408
There is no law. Its common sense. Now if you want to get technical, all sorts of consumer fraud laws would apply here. They fail to disclose inherent serious security risks. They intentionally add backdoors and accounts that cannot be deleted. This would need to be certified a class since individual losses are minimal.Under what law?
Are you sure? They have exploits (wanted or unwanted, hard to tell) for over.. 4+ years. Myself and my company has been reporting them from the first start, when we discovered a path traversal vulnerability back in 2008, if I do remember well.
That raises the costs of the installer... Race to bottom?
On this, I do agree... maybe at least explain what is a firmware and what is an update.
My simple question is: in a market like this, who should be hold accountable and who should pay the losses?
Most other exploits were not as widely reported in the mainstream press. The ones that have been had some positive effect. When foscams were reported exploited, the US distributor began notifying everyone by email and posting a notification to update firmware on its main page (until they screwed their customers and reopened as amcrest)
There is often no cost to add vpn, and when there is its minimal.
No one will likely pay the losses.
Regardless, this highlights the point that you cannot rely on firmware to stop attacks, the manufactures will always be behind the hackers.