6 ms·
In Europe the we have the laws that protect consumer rights. The thing missing is somebody to define that severe security vulnerability is considered as a defe
by jpalomaki 7y ago
In Europe the we have the laws that protect consumer rights.
The thing missing is somebody to define that severe security vulnerability is considered as a defect in the product. Once this is done, consumers can either demand the seller to fix the problem, replace product or give refund. This should pretty quickly create a financial incentive to sell products which get updates.
- Groxx 7y agoThis would be a huge improvement for made-and-sold-in-Europe, and would at least make a sizable dent... but the rest of the internet still exists, and doesn't care where the botnet devices are made or installed, only that they exist. Still, yea, this is exactly the kind of thing that needs to become commonplace. Hopefully it will be, though this is far from the first time that something like this has happened and here we still are.
- TeMPOraL 7y agoYou have to start somewhere. See also: GDPR - it's already made enough waves that other nations and even some US states are considering similar legislation.
- johnnycab 7y agoWhat are your experiences of acquiring information in Poland under GDPR, especially if you were either denied or came across any hurdles in exercising your rights; whether or not the subsequent disclosure was to your satisfaction?
- StavrosK 7y agoI'm not temporal, but haven't had many bad experiences that I chased up. I didn't request some data from Revolut that they didn't provide, but I didn't email their compliance officer to request it. I think they would have provided it if I had. Still, even just the fact that companies are now thinking about this and providing ways to download/delete your data makes me love the GDPR.
- TeMPOraL 7y agoI haven't pursued any GDPR requests yet (though I considered it in some cases). For now, I'm just happily reaping benefits, such as having an option to download my data, or discovering that some off-line desktop games (like Kerbal Space Program, of all things!) did track me - past May 25, 2018, they suddenly started showing popups informing about this, and (this is the best part) I could deny it and keep playing.
- bluGill 7y agoA lot of companies want to sell world wide. It is a lot easier to have and support one product for the world than multiple products for each country. I have to regularly attend training which amounts to "Australian customers really want this product but we are still working on getting certification so be careful not to ship one accidentally. (It is a radio transmitter)
- greglindahl 7y agoYou can't wave a magic wand and harmonize radio frequency allocations -- they're different and change slowly.
- tomp 7y agoPowerful countries have the ability to apply their law extrateritorially, especially law concerning companies... e.g. UK stipulates that bribery is illegal everywhere in the world, so a UK company employing people in China and those Chinese employees bribing Chinese officials is illegal (in the UK), so the UK parent company could be responsible... Easy to do the same thing here, as long as the company has (and wants to keep having) presence in the EU that's enough to enforce standards worldwide.
- jpalomaki 7y agoOn second thought.. It might be the law already covers this. It would be just the question of somebody testing it. Take a relatively new() device with unpatched security hole, try to get it replaced/refunded and if necessary proceed to court to get a decision on the matter. Although I wonder if any vendor actually wants to go to court arguing that a product with severe security issue is actually working as intended. () Safe bet should be a device purchased less than 2 years ago, since that seems to be the time the vendor is at least responsible for defects.
- rndgermandude 7y agoSpeaking EU/Germany-centric, the problem with suing a company is that the company can always make the case go away by replacing the faulty product with either a repaired product, a very similar product of equal or greater worth or refunding a customer for the product and any losses incurred. A court will readily accept this even if the plaintiff customer might not want to accept it. And it's better to just silence a single suit this way (or a few) than to get a sentence against you on the books that will encourage everybody else to demand replacements or even sue too.
- ahje 7y agoExactly. I've returned products due to firmware problems in the past, although they were not security related. In one case I was asked to give a written description of the problem before I got a refund. The other store returned the money without questions. It's not really any different from a product that broke under warranty in my experience.
- jonas21 7y ago> This should pretty quickly create a financial incentive to sell products which get updates. Or an incentive not to sell in Europe.
- dspillett 7y agoSpeaking as a European (for the time being at least) that is fine by me. If a company makes unsafe rubbish, they can feel free to not try to sell it to me. I'm sure someone else will happily take their place. Of course that doesn't fix the global problem.