3 ms·
Fantastic write up from a hacking point of view. I did wonder about this statement though: "This is very invasive and unacceptable. It may seem necessary to ap
by davedx 7y ago
Fantastic write up from a hacking point of view. I did wonder about this statement though:
"This is very invasive and unacceptable. It may seem necessary to apply security patches published by your ISP but the user should be able to disable it whenever she wants."
Legally, at least in countries where I've lived, the ISP still owns the router. This surprised me a bit when I first found out, but then I got used to the idea, but you should treat any ISP or telecom gear in your house as something that's "rented but still owned and controlled by someone else".
- yjftsjthsd-h 7y agoAnd that is why I have my own router plugged into the ISP router:)
- blacksmith_tb 7y agoTrue, but I think it's worth comparing it to other utilities in your home - what if your electric company could make all your lightbulbs 20% dimmer without notice? Or if your water heater was remotely administered? ISPs, like mobile telcos, like to claim they must have control over your hardware "for security" but I think the most charitable interpretation is that it's to make their customer service dept. sweat less (more nefarious possibilities exist, of course).
- CJefferson 7y agoThe difference is that non-updated routers can cause global problems. At the very least as an ISP I'd want to say you can look after updates yourself, but we will disable your access to the internet (other than to get the update from us) whenever we try to push an update to you and you reject it.
- ProZsolt 7y agoThis is why I like separate modems, so there is a clear border between you and the ISP. Sadly currently most of the providers only give you AIOs.