3 ms·
Fair would be sending executives to jail for hacking. Releasing a non-backdoored BIOS was the absolute minimum. Edit: As pointed out by josteink, the BIOS wasn
by deogeo 8y ago
Fair would be sending executives to jail for hacking. Releasing a non-backdoored BIOS was the absolute minimum.
Edit: As pointed out by josteink, the BIOS wasn't backdoored - it was used to install a backdoor. But calling what it installed "insecure Windows-software" is also inaccurate. According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superfish#Lenovo_security_incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superfish#Lenovo_security_inci..., its purpose was man-in-the-middle attacks against the user. So I still think criminal liability and jail time would be just. Ordinary people have been sent to jail for far less.
- stcredzero 8y agoFair would be sending executives to jail for hacking. That would be up to a prosecutor. A civil suit would take the form of a class action.
- josteink 8y agoTo be fair and technically correct, the BIOS itself was not backdoored. The BIOS itself was fine, but it contained insecure Windows-software which it requested/instructed Windows to install. Install any other OS (like Linux) and there would be no backdoor at all. To be clear I’m not trying to defend Lenovo’s actions here, I’m just trying to be clear about what this incident was actually about. The simplistic description is IMO a bit too simplistic in this case.
- walshemj 8y agoOr banning for a period of years the company from any government work as happened to Arthur Anderson in the UK.