3 ms·

projecting much? :) I personally agree with the point being afraid of incompetence, not malice.

by gcb0 8y ago

dpark 8y ago
It’s not as if someone is going to experience a false alarm in their own system, accidentally access your system via a giant security failure and random account mangling, while your system is experiencing a real alarm at the same moment, and then unintentionally silence your alarm. The level of coincidence here is absurd. The alternative concern that Nest is so incompetent that they somehow issue an automatic silence command (either to all alarms or just yours) seems no more plausible than First Alert being so incompetent that your alarm simply doesn’t work. Especially in combination with the fact that this incompetence must either be undetected permanently (i.e. they always silence your alarm and never notice the horrendous bug) or coincidentally tied to an actual fire in your home, this is probably roughly as likely as a meteorite flattening your house. The only “viable” concern here is to that an attacker might silence your alarm maliciously, which implies a lot of dedication from an enemy, because they are literally trying to murder you. Presumably this enemy is also an arsonist because otherwise there’s likely no alarm to silence and if there is, it’s likely a false alarm.
- gcb0 8y ago
  your landlord will get the notification about carbon monoxide on their phone. Then they will call you. It might be a false alarm twice. Then it might be real the third time but then they decided to not call you and just silence it. lot's of thing can happen by incompetence, not even have to go too far on the scenarios.
  - dpark 8y ago
    Why would they silence the alarm? It's just a notification on their phone. Silencing doesn't accomplish anything for them. The first time my landlord silenced a "false alarm", I'd tell them not to ever do that again. The second time, I'd reset the device and register it under an account they don't control. But yes, I do see your concern now. I was not initially thinking of the landlord actually controlling the device, merely installing and allowing the tenant to control it. There's a lot less ridiculous coincidence required for a landlord to stupidly silence the alarm.

projecting much? :) I personally agree with the point being afraid of incompetence, not malice.

by gcb0 8y ago

projecting much? :) I personally agree with the point being afraid of incompetence, not malice.

It’s not as if someone is going to experience a false alarm in their own system, accidentally access your system via a giant security failure and random account mangling, while your system is experiencing a real alarm at the same moment, and then unintentionally silence your alarm. The level of coincidence here is absurd. The alternative concern that Nest is so incompetent that they somehow issue an automatic silence command (either to all alarms or just yours) seems no more plausible than First Alert being so incompetent that your alarm simply doesn’t work. Especially in combination with the fact that this incompetence must either be undetected permanently (i.e. they always silence your alarm and never notice the horrendous bug) or coincidentally tied to an actual fire in your home, this is probably roughly as likely as a meteorite flattening your house. The only “viable” concern here is to that an attacker might silence your alarm maliciously, which implies a lot of dedication from an enemy, because they are literally trying to murder you. Presumably this enemy is also an arsonist because otherwise there’s likely no alarm to silence and if there is, it’s likely a false alarm.

gcb0 8y ago
your landlord will get the notification about carbon monoxide on their phone. Then they will call you. It might be a false alarm twice. Then it might be real the third time but then they decided to not call you and just silence it. lot's of thing can happen by incompetence, not even have to go too far on the scenarios.
- dpark 8y ago
  Why would they silence the alarm? It's just a notification on their phone. Silencing doesn't accomplish anything for them. The first time my landlord silenced a "false alarm", I'd tell them not to ever do that again. The second time, I'd reset the device and register it under an account they don't control. But yes, I do see your concern now. I was not initially thinking of the landlord actually controlling the device, merely installing and allowing the tenant to control it. There's a lot less ridiculous coincidence required for a landlord to stupidly silence the alarm.