Consumer Reports Unfairly Punishes D-link For Giving Users Options

[fenderman]

In a recent article Consumer Reports falsely alleged that the D-link DCS-2630L has a security flaw. This alleged "flaw" concerns the cameras ability to serve its video stream locally or remotely bypassing the default cloud data transfer as we see in nest/ring/arlo. The flaw according to Consumer Reports is that the data is stream is not encrypted. News flash Jerry Beilinson - that is how MOST IP CAMERAS WORK. It is up to the user to then decide how to secure that feed (we recommend VPN). In essence they are punishing D-link for giving the end user the OPTION to serve their own video. Shameful. There are many other reasons not to buy this camera, however, this nonsense is not one of them.

D-Link Camera Poses Data Security Risk, Consumer Reports Finds

 

[CCTVCam]

But most consumers may never realize they’re vulnerable, says Robert Richter, who leads security and privacy testing in CR’s labs.

I think that quote from the article, sums up the crux of the problem. Being a consumer orientated camera they're expecting it to be sold to people who have no knowledge about PC's, networks or security, ie it's a camera for dummies and expected to be a simple secure plug and play solution.

Probably what they should have done is put in a warning popup box that appears when you select the unencrypted streaming to say "This is an advanced output option and is unencrypted. The video from this can potentially intercepted and viewed by anyone on the internet. For your own privacy and safety, please use external software to separately encrypt this stream if this option is selected."

I agree it's a bit harsh to rubbish the product simply because it has an option to stream unencrypted.

 

[fenderman]

I think that quote from the article, sums up the crux of the problem. Being a consumer orientated camera they're expecting it to be sold to people who have no knowledge about PC's, networks or security, ie it's a camera for dummies and expected to be a simple secure plug and play solution.

Probably what they should have done is put in a warning popup box that appears when you select the unencrypted streaming to say "This is an advanced output option and is unencrypted. The video from this can potentially intercepted and viewed by anyone on the internet. For your own privacy and safety, please use external software to separately encrypt this stream if this option is selected."

I agree it's a bit harsh to rubbish the product simply because it has an option to stream unencrypted.

They did nothing wrong...the consumer reports writer is a moron. D-Link deserves praise...FYI nest allows users to create feeds that are not password protected. That is how some uses feed those cams to Blue Iris...where is the rant about that?
Pop up warnings are as useful as the warning on ointments to not injest them...heres your sign... there are lots of consumer oriented camera hardware that instruct uses to port forward, consumer reports didn't trash them.. remember this consumer would still have to setup port forwarding rules as there is no indication from the article that UPnP is involved.
That nonsense about hackers getting into your network via WiFi is insane. The guy is an inept fear monger. I'll email him a link to this thread tommorow.

 

[tangent]

Consumer reports is great at reviewing lots of things like toilets, refrigerators, vacuums, and cars, but frankly they are AWFUL at reviewing all consumer electronics. Compare a CR review of a TV, soundbar, cell phone, printer, pretty much anything electronic to a review from someone like cnet, pcworld, etc. and the only reaction most tech savvy people will have is "what the fuck are the people at consumer reports smoking". Their reviews of electronics are SO BAD it actually casts some doubt on the rest of their reviews. Even the freaking wire cutter does a better job of recommending decent electronics than consumer reports. I actually like consumer reports, but I think they'd be better off if they stopped trying to review electronics.

 

[looney2ns]

Consumer reports is great at reviewing lots of things like toilets, refrigerators, vacuums, and cars, but frankly they are AWFUL at reviewing all consumer electronics. Compare a CR review of a TV, soundbar, cell phone, printer, pretty much anything electronic to a review from someone like cnet, pcworld, etc. and the only reaction most tech savvy people will have is "what the fuck are the people at consumer reports smoking". Their reviews of electronics are SO BAD it actually casts some doubt on the rest of their reviews. Even the freaking wire cutter does a better job of recommending decent electronics than consumer reports. I actually like consumer reports, but I think they'd be better off if they stopped trying to review electronics.

Yep, I agree. Their electronics reviews have been full of utter nonsense for years.....

 

[TonyR]

Message to Consumer Reports and to the Pope (with respect):
"Stay in your own lane".

 

[tangent]

Yep, I agree. Their electronics reviews have been full of utter nonsense for years.....

I've actually pondered how it is that their electronics reviews are so awful. I know they do employ at least a few people with a reasonably technical background.
Some possibilities:

1. The reviews start out decent be get passed to an editor who's VCR is still flashing 12:00
2. The reviewers aren't very tech savvy and wouldn't even be able to handle something relatively easy like streaming music on their LAN without the "cloud".
3. They're trying too hard to dumb it down so it doesn't scare away the 90 year olds who's most advanced piece of consumer electronics is a cordless phone.
4. The portion of their subscribers who respond to their surveys aren't very tech savvy and it skews the results of surveys regarding consumer electronics.

It's probably a combination of all of these. Explaining technology to Luddites isn't easy, but giving them bad information just makes things worse.

 

[CCTVCam]

.. remember this consumer would still have to setup port forwarding rules as there is no indication from the article that UPnP is involved.

I guess when you take that into account you would kind of expect them to be aware of the dangers. It is harsh if other manufacturers also do this but D-Link have been singled out. I agree warnings are useless in so far as they're often ignored. However, at least if you have them, reviews such as this can't level the accusation that the product leaves you vulnerable, as you were at least warned if you used an unsecured method.

 

[fenderman]

I guess when you take that into account you would kind of expect them to be aware of the dangers. It is harsh if other manufacturers also do this but D-Link have been singled out. I agree warnings are useless in so far as they're often ignored. However, at least if you have them, reviews such as this can't level the accusation that the product leaves you vulnerable, as you were at least warned if you used an unsecured method.

To clarify, the other "smart" cam manufactures dont server video from the cameras. They allow you to view a non password protected stream from their cloud, simply by knowing the url.

 

[TonyR]

@fenderman , thanks for this info. I clicked on the link and read the report. OMG....I wonder if I write the author, Jerry Beilinson, if he can also tell me:

If I'm driving on the freeway, I'm very tired and if I set the cruise control on my motorhome, can I go to the back and lay down for a quick nap?

1. They're trying too hard to dumb it down so it doesn't scare away the 90 year olds who's most advanced piece of consumer electronics is a cordless phone.

LOL! I can see it now....900MHz... or the really old 27MHz with the 3 section telescoping antenna you had to extend.

 

[looney2ns]

@fenderman , thanks for this info. I clicked on the link and read the report. OMG....I wonder if I write the author, Jerry Beilinson, if he can also tell me:

If I'm driving on the freeway, I'm very tired and if I set the cruise control on my motorhome, can I go to the back and lay down for a quick nap?

I'll answer for Jerry, sure why not?
Big stars do it.

 

[tangent]

I miss the consumerist it was some of the consumer union / consumer report's best reporting.

 

[whatevah]

Back in the mid-2000s (before the recession), I was a commissioned sales dude selling digital cameras... I learned to hate consumer reports back then, since their reviews were obviously paid for or just clueless.