45 ms·
Ubiquiti is suing Brian Krebs for his reporting on their breach
- giantg2 5y agoSeems like a ridiculous suit, but it also seems like Krebs calling it a cover up is sort of a gray area. They did send some sort of notification, but didn't necessarily conceal it either. Looking forward to the ruling and reasoning - the legal determination of what constitutes a cover up. Especially since most places use the generic type notifications.
- QuinnyPig 5y agoGenerally I tend to take a dim view of bullies, and an $18B company suing an independent journalist for saying mean things on the internet is basically the textbook example of that.
- Godel_unicode 5y agoGenerally I take a dim view of shoddy journalism. Not doing adequate investigation before printing, then refusing to retract when it turns out you were wrong is basically a textbook example of that. I get that people really like him, but he had plenty of time to do the right thing here and has nobody to blame but himself.
- paxys 5y agoRegardless of what Krebs said, the bar for defamation in US courts is incredibly high. Nothing is going to come out of this.
- smnrchrds 5y ago> Nothing is going to come out of this. How much would it cost to make it go away? If it's going to cost millions of dollars, the defendant is toast regardless.
- giantg2 5y agoApparently insurance for legal defense is big business today. But yeah, generally even an unsuccessful suit will ruin normal people.
- xxpor 5y agoCalling it a cover up is a clear opinion, not a statement of fact. Just the fact that there's a debate about what cover up even means goes to that.
- BeefWellington 5y agoCourts don't always have sensible views on these things though.
- xxpor 5y agoIn the US, they do. If the district court doesn't, someone higher will.
- giantg2 5y agoDo you have experience in the courts? It's an absolute shitshow. I've seen a magistrate think that I'm calling them prejudiced when asking to dismiss with prejudice... really. Magistrates aren't required to be lawyers or even pass the Bar. I thought the next level up would provide some level of competence, but no. The judge had poor logic skills and even poorer knowledge of the rules of criminal procedure (spent their career in family court and was past retirement age, so they brought them back as a senior judge in criminal side). Guy couldn't logic his way out of a wet paper bag. Even if you get better judges at higher levels, which is debatable given they are either politically elected or politically appointed, the cost in time and money dramatically increases.
- starwind 5y agoThat gray area strongly favors Krebs. They have to show Krebs knew that there wasn't a cover up. Krebs can make an affirmative defense that basically says "this honestly seemed like a covered up to me" and win
- giantg2 5y agoI agree. But it will likely cost tens of thousands of dollars and years of his life to defend it.
- starwind 5y agoHe may be insured against defamation cases. My umbrella policy explicitly covers me is someone sues me for libel or slander
- InTheArena 5y agoRemember that he doubled down after the report came out that this was a insider attack. The first time he could have been taken at face value. The second time? Seems closer to willful ignorance.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- r1ch 5y agoAs if I need another reason not to recommend Ubiquiti... Yes, Kreb's reporting wasn't great and he should have retracted the original article once the facts came out, but I don't think being a bad journalist is something you take someone to court for.
- brightball 5y agoI hear great things about Mikrotik
- JamesBrooks 5y agoI still have Ubiquiti wireless equipment but the rest of my network incorporates Mikrotik and I've been really enjoying using it the past few years.
- wnevets 5y agoStories like this make me wary of using their products. [1] [1] https://www.microsoft.com/security/blog/2022/03/16/uncovering-trickbots-use-of-iot-devices-in-command-and-control-infrastructure/ https://www.microsoft.com/security/blog/2022/03/16/uncoverin...
- r1ch 5y agoWhile there have been remote exploits against exposed management ports, the vast majority of compromised Mikrotik devices are caused by insecure configurations by users. Mikrotik is huge in the smaller ISP world and especially in developing countries due to the low cost, but those users are not always the most security conscious.
- Godel_unicode 5y agoThe linked article from Microsoft goes into some detail about the vulnerability in Mikrotik that was being used, and there are many other examples of this happening. Weak creds are also an issue, but their software is pretty buggy from a security standpoint. If you run Mikrotik gear exposed to the public internet, I hope you have good logging and are keeping a sharp eye on it.
- austinkhale 5y agoReally a poor decision to come after Brian Krebs. The crossover between Ubiquiti customers and people that support Krebs, I would venture to guess, is quite high. What a way to incinerate a pile of goodwill.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- joenathanone 5y agoYeah, I've spent hundreds of thousands with Ubiquiti and this has me seriously considering my choices.
- xuki 5y agoCan you recommend a good alternative for their APs in a home office environment?
- walrus01 5y agomikrotik has some pretty good 802.11ac standalone APs, such as this: https://mikrotik.com/product/cap_ac https://mikrotik.com/product/cap_ac for home use at this point I would also recommend mikrotik routers over anything ubiquiti edgeOS based, since they seem to have abandoned development on their fork of vyatta... the $50 edgerouter-x (ER-X) as a standalone wired gigabit router was a good choice in 2017 but not so much anymore.
- eek2121 5y agoSad that Ubiquiti has decided to become victim of the "Streisand Effect" rather than simply working on the crux of the issue and/or working with him.
- fastball 5y agoThe crux of the issue is that the "hacker" was the head of cloud at Ubiquiti, who used Krebs as part of an extortion attempt, which was only possible because apparently Krebs is a bit of a lazy journalist with poor due diligence habits. What exactly does Krebs have to offer if Ubiquiti "works with him"?
- irjustin 5y agoThis seems like a journalistic nightmare. The original article[0] seems perfectly fine. But, if "Adam" (original informant) and Sharp are the same person[1] and Sharp is in fact the person who perform the breach such that this is an inside job instead of an external hack. IANAL and while I'm not sure of the merit to this lawsuit itself, there's still a lot of problems if your informant is the person performing the illegal activity. [0] https://krebsonsecurity.com/2021/03/whistleblower-ubiquiti-breach-catastrophic/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/2021/03/whistleblower-ubiquiti-b... [1] https://krebsonsecurity.com/2021/12/ubiquiti-developer-charged-with-extortion-causing-2020-breach/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/2021/12/ubiquiti-developer-charg...
- thesausageking 5y agoCompletely unethical of Krebs not to update his original article and mention this. He got tricked into helping a hacker trying to extort money, and owes it to the community to set the record straight.
- alphager 5y ago> Update, Dec. 5, 2021: The Justice Department has indicted a former Ubiquiti developer for allegedly causing the 2020 “breach” and trying to extort the company. Seems pretty updated to me.
- thesausageking 5y agoHe never mentions that his source "Adam" was actually the Ubiquiti insider who was extorting them at the time. I mean, the hacker used Krebs to further his extortion attempt and Krebs has never addressed it here or anywhere else.
- Natsu 5y agoYeah, I think the lawsuit is probably bogus, but so is the Twitter logic that people who sue the media are never portrayed in media as good guys. If Krebs was unwittingly used the attacker, I think he should update his stories, but that depends on that allegation being true. I don't think that should be worth a lawsuit, but it would reflect badly on him if that's proven true and he doesn't update. Of course, filing lawsuits over disclosure of security issues is also a bad look, but I never used their stuff to begin with.
- cebert 5y agoIt’s disappointing to hear that Ubiquity is engaging in this behavior. I’ve enjoyed and recommend their Amplifi products in the past, but it will be much more difficult for me to consider supporting them in the future. I wonder how their PR team determined this would help their image and reputation.
- tiahura 5y agoI’m an attorney who has both filed a defamation case, and installed then junked Ubiquity routers and APs. If the facts as alleged are true (as an attorney I usually assume they aren’t) then heck yes they should sue. This is the type of defamation case that actually doesn’t get dismissed. I.e. making specific, factually incorrect statements, directed at the business of the Plaintiff, for Defendant’s own commercial gain. I hope Krebs has insurance.
- walrus01 5y agoubiquiti also has a very poor recent track record of EOLing products and making it near impossible to use - earlier generation security cameras and unifi wireless APs, for instance, which still work perfectly fine. But now it's an incredible hassle to find the linux packages to install on your own hardware to host the controller for them. they also had (maybe still have) such poor internal controls that they got spearphished to the tune of $46 million in wire transfer: https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=ubiquiti+networks+scammed+wire+transfer https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=ubiquit... you know that something has gone wrong with a tech company when the founder's ego has inflated to the size that they think the best thing in life to do is buy a professional basketball team.
- sydthrowaway 5y agoI feel deja-vu from reading this comment before.
- gshulegaard 5y agoInteresting, I have 3 edgerouters and UniFi AP which have been trucking for the better part of a decade. Can you point me in the direction for sources for their EoL issues? I am about to double down on Ubiquiti as the networking backbone and security cameras for my new house, so I have a special interest in this currently.
- InTheArena 5y agoI have this configuration. It works fine, especially if you use homebridge or scrypted to tie it to HomeKit.
- darknavi 5y agoLook up Unifi Video if you want to see what became of it. AFAIK you can still self-host it just fine but their NAT-punching/forwarding service was killed.
- joveian 5y agoAlso don't forget their repeated GPL violations. https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2019/oct/02/cambium-ubiquiti-gpl-violations/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2019/oct/02/cambium-ubiquiti-... I couldn't find anything about the outcome of that one.
- bufferoverflow 5y agoNote to self: don't buy Ubiquity gear, they must be incompetent, going after the messenger of their own incompetence.
- syntaxing 5y agoUpsetting since I just bought into the Ubiquiti system...What competitor is the best alternative?
- duxup 5y agoUbiquiti Seems to offer a lot of products so hard to know what everyone’s use case is but for home wi-fi I found Netgear’s Orbi mesh system surprisingly capable.
- quantified 5y ago> Welp @briankrebs is getting pride of place in my RSS reader for the next decade based upon this.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- Adraghast 5y agoBased upon letting himself get conned by Nick Sharp?
- tlogan 5y agoThe bar for defamation in US courts is incredibly high. But it seems like they have a proof that Kerbs knew very much it was not a coverup.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- avazhi 5y agoAs somebody who hadn't heard of this before now, the Streisand effect is real.
- dec0dedab0de 5y agoAbout 10 years ago I was pushing for ubiquiti at the fortune 500 company I was a jr network engineer for. Mostly because they were the most open vendor and didn't require an "appliance" to run the management software. The rest of my team laughed at me and we only really tested Aruba and Cisco. Even though we never went with it I feel like a sucker every time they come up in the news lately.
- unethical_ban 5y agoMeh. Nobody got fired for buying Cisco. I was already off the Ubiquiti train once they started forcing people to buy a hardware appliance for Unifi Video, rather than allowing the previously 100% working software package to be used. Extend, embrace, extinguish. They had the enthusiast crowd and got greedy.
- ziml77 5y agoWell then I guess I'm finally done with Ubiquiti. The company that makes my network devices needs to take security seriously. Clearly Ubiquiti does not.
- gonehome 5y agoThis twitter thread is pretty bad and the comments here aren't much better. IIRC the Ubiquiti 'hack' was an insider attack from an employee lying and intentionally breaking things while pushing his lies to the press to hurt his employer. Krebs was wrong and tricked by the employee. I don't know if that justifies this legal action, but it's not the normal going after someone who reported a breach. This one is more complicated. I'm pretty sure Corey is wrong on the facts in this case (and so was Brian). I also felt a lot better about Ubiquiti once the dust settled and the details about Sharp came out. Edit: I missed this comment thread which basically says the same thing: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30850793 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30850793
- xbar 5y agoYou have a loosely defined term: "bad." It suggests "inaccurate" but perhaps you mean "unkind." In either case, you assert "Krebs was wrong" a couple times but you skirt the topic of the twitter thread, the comments, and the lawsuit: that Krebs intentionally misled readers in order to drive traffic for ad revenue. Do you think Krebs did this? Krebs got the big story exactly right: Ubiquiti had a bad security problem and flubbed the handling of it.
- gonehome 5y agoKrebs certainly did not get the story “exactly right” nor did he take responsibility for how wrong he was (and how he was used by the attacker).
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- harry8 5y agoMaybe? You aren't presenting any evidence for "how wrong he was" and "how he was used by the attacker." You're sure of it? Why? What other explanations are possible here? None?
- 5y ago
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- thornjm 5y agoPerhaps the title should be editorialised to reflect that it was an extortion attempt by an insider?
- A4ET8a8uTh0 5y agoIt genuinely sucks, because Ubiquiti and PFsense were my top contenders for my major network overhaul. I genuinely like the UI of Ubiquiti, modularity and features. But moves like that make very careful about going ahead with the purchase. It seems like I will need to learn how to operate PFsense.
- Arnavion 5y agoWell, in that case you should read the comments of these first. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27768934 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27768934 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30719013 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30719013
- A4ET8a8uTh0 5y agoThank you! It seems like it is genuinely hard to make a safe decision these days. In such cases, the question appears to revolve around, which appears to be less bad. Are there any other alternatives worth exploring?
- Arnavion 5y agoYes, OPNsense. Or use OpenBSD (unixsheikh has a guide) or Linux (Vyos, OpenWRT, etc).
- 3np 5y agoNon-signup-wall: http://jebqj47jgxleaiosfcxfibx2xdahjettuydlxbg64azd4khsxv6kawid.onion/QuinnyPig/status/1508965090019577856 http://jebqj47jgxleaiosfcxfibx2xdahjettuydlxbg64azd4khsxv6ka... https://nitter.privacy.com.de/QuinnyPig/status/1508965090019577856 https://nitter.privacy.com.de/QuinnyPig/status/1508965090019...
- varenc 5y agoHere's a link to the actual complaint: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63197557/ubiquiti-inc-v-krebs/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63197557/ubiquiti-inc-v... Ubiquiti is asking for: WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Ubiquiti Inc. demands judgment against Defendant Brian Krebs as follows: (a) awarding compensatory damages in an amount to be determined at trial, but greater than $75,000.00; (b) awarding Ubiquiti $350,000 in punitive damages or in an amount to be determined at trial; (c) awarding Plaintiff all expenses and costs, including attorneys’ fees; and (d) such other and further relief as the Court deems appropriate. Which is certainly a lot of money, but nothing compared to the billions Krebs' supposed "defamation" cost Ubiquiti. I suppose their goal with this must be to improve their reputation with potential business customers?
- sofixa 5y agoUbiquiti don't have business customers in any significant numbers. Their support and QA are basically non-existant, and after they destroyed their reputation with the homelab/tinkerers community which might have helped fill that gap/make the jump, they're on a downward spiral.
- washadjeffmad 5y agoMarkets exist between residential and large enterprise. I kind of doubt they would manufacture and sell their ISP lines if they had no customers. Plus, this is why they're suing Krebs. People like you have this opinion and don't really know why. Sharp's strategy was effective.
- sofixa 5y agoThey already had all the problems listed before the security debacle. The only thing added is that now everyone knows their "cloud" is of very poor quality and has no real security. So now, suing a journalist is going to fix their reputation? Good luck with that, there's around zero chance of that happening. The way to fix their reputation would be to consolidate product lines, do QA and not ship broken software, and stuff like this. Admit mistakes were made, and outline their strategy on fixing them ( the parts about abandoning hardware lines and security). Digging in won't do them any favours.
- inetknght 5y agoI've spent several thousand $ on Ubiquiti hardware. After a poor experience with their support team and shitacular integration between their ERX and UniFi products I'm looking to change vendors. To be clear with my own experience: - Ubiquiti requires an online login to use UniFi products (which you _should not_ encourage especially for home/prosumer use) - UniFi does not integrate with the products that you might have purchased when you were less experienced or have less requirements. For example: I bought several EdgeRouter X products then moved on to UniFi products because I needed SFP+. UniFi management does not manage any EdgeRouter devices despite being manufactured by the same company, so I effectively have a dozen different network management pages to deal with. - The web interface for UniFi is terrible; they've had a "new" UI and an "old" UI and support requires you to use the old UI to retrieve information to solve a lot of the problems. The "new" UI looks nice but often renders incorrectly (especially the network topology page). - Support will sometimes ask you to SSH into your own devices to do certain steps that can't be done from their fancy UI. - UniFi has several different settings pages all with overlapping and confusing terminologies instead of having an actual _unified_ settings page for all of the products being managed. - I've also had trouble managing their updates insomuch as one device that they claim was bricked but in fact simply wasn't compatible (and wasn't _advertised_ as incompatible) with my network settings. They told me to RMA the item (at my own cost) and the replacement item had the exact same problem and required additional troubleshooting after I'd already spent money and time to return the item. After resolving that problem, with a USP-Plug, it ended up creating its own wifi network whose security can't be configured by me. I'm sure glad I don't have to deal with network audits... I think Krebs is a scapegoat. That doesn't excuse any incorrect information he has on his blog. But Ubiquiti certainly isn't a bastion of good either.
- philjohn 5y agoIt's worth mentioning that no, you don't need an online login any more, they quickly reversed that when people pointed out it was a silly idea.
- nottorp 5y agoThey did? I have an AP and I keep the old version of their admin app on an old computer, but when i tried to install something newer it started some crap with a cloud login so I gave up. Did they revert it? You can really use an AP with recent firmware now without connecting in any shape or form to Ubiquity servers?
- InTheArena 5y agoKrebs was at basically the definition of a unwitting accessory on this one. His “I got the facts right” post afterwords when it became clear that he enabled the reputation damage at the behest of the extortionist doubled down on the damage. I’m not sure I agree with ubiquities decision to go after him - see the Streisand effect - but he has made some really dubious choices.
- bigjoedeez 5y agoUbiquiti is also run by a bunch of morons, so this makes sense.
- shadowfacts 5y agoI am not a lawyer. That said, I'm skeptical of the merits of this suit. Here's the actual complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vaed.521759/gov.uscourts.vaed.521759.1.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vaed.52... Ubiquiti seems to be arguing (count 1) that Krebs defamed them by not clearly identifying Sharp as his source in the December 2 post and December 5 update to the original article. That simply updating the original article constitutes repeating everything contained in it and is therefore defamatory beggars belief. They also argue (count 2) that the initial March article was defamatory. But it can't have been if if Krebs at the time didn't know the information provided by his source, Sharp, was false. Presumably Sharp didn't share that with Krebs that he was the one behind the breach, so Krebs wouldn't have had particular reason to suspect he was providing false information. Maybe Sharp defamed them, since he obviously did know he was telling falsehoods, but it's hard to see how Krebs did (and two of the supposedly defamatory statements in count 2 are just Krebs describing or quoting what Sharp said). Bad journalistic practices may abound, but I don't think any of that constitutes defamation. Neither Krebs nor Ubiquiti look great here.
- HstryrsrBttn 5y ago
- throwawaybutwhy 5y agoKrebs is a sleazy underhanded journo, too fond of doxxing his targets without any notion of 'due process' and buying leaks on the black market. I was tricked into reading his scoops and it took a couple of years for the truth to trickle down into my coffee-addled brain.
- curiousgal 5y agoThank you! Exactly, I honestly hope this forms a reality check for him.
- SixDouble5321 5y agoWould love to see something with a source or something verifiable. Until then I have to assume this is mean spirited hogwash.
- detaro 5y agoSome starting points to some previous messes (just what was quick to find, not the most balanced sources): https://itwire.com/security/infosec-researchers-slam-ex-wapo-man-krebs-over-doxxing.html https://itwire.com/security/infosec-researchers-slam-ex-wapo... https://itwire.com/business-it-news/security/image-board-admins,-mods-doxxed-by-ex-wapo-man-on-coinhive-hunt.html https://itwire.com/business-it-news/security/image-board-adm... https://www.emptywheel.net/2017/11/28/the-russian-metadata-in-the-shadow-brokers-dump/ https://www.emptywheel.net/2017/11/28/the-russian-metadata-i...
- chriscappuccio 5y agoCorey is really playing up the media aspect here. I think Corey's tweet exemplifies the problem here which Krebs speculation helped spread; Ubiquiti had no actual security breach, they had an insider ransom fraud. Krebs was also a victim, as the conduit for the attacker to speak as a "whistleblower". When they notified Krebs, Krebs left up their unfounded speculation. This isn't what reputable news organizations do. Despite all of this, it's probably going to be hard for Ubiquiti here, obviously has a good chance of not making it to trial.
- zeagle 5y agoAm I alone in thinking better of Ubiquiti through this? I remember when the original post came out and I was worried about having compromised gear at home. Then it turns out it wasn't true and the author of the post refused to update it to acknowledge that he was manipulated after it became clear. I don't follow Krebs so don't have an opinion on him but I'm happy the security problem is a non issue.
- izacus 5y agoNo, you're not alone. In times where so-called journalists consistently churn out lying unverified articles we'd be well served if more of them faced any kind of consequences of publishing lies knowingly.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- joveian 5y agoWhy do you think it means it was a non-issue? The employee could have sold credentials just as easily as anyone else.
- zeagle 5y agoThanks for making my defend my viewpoint. This isn't my field but my rationale in saying this is because their system was not externally breached and they also said no customer data was accessed or even targeted. That's reassuring in that I don't think my (home) hardware is in danger. I do have the log in from cloud with credentials feature turned off from that I recall and changed my local password. I think it's hard defend against an internal bad actor but you are right he could have sold hashes or left a backdoor or something. I do agree with the anti-SLAPP comments having read more about this since I posted that.
- joveian 5y agoThanks for describing your thinking. I'm also not an expert but read more about this stuff than most people. If you read carefully, Ubiquiti did not say that no customer data was accessed, they said they have no evidence that customer data was accessed. The first article Krebs wrote quotes the employee (likely the person arrested) saying that this was because they didn't keep logs long enough (this fact was confirmed in Ubiquiti's complaint). That it was the person accessing the data who was able get rid of logs showing the data accessed doesn't change the lack of logs. It was externally breached in the sense that an empoloyee downloaded the data from outside the company and could have done anything with it prior to being caught (and could potentially have it stashed somewhere for later use). Ubiquiti also never denied that legal overrode technical considerations in not forcing all accounts to be reset. The initial reporting was substantially correct and the post was updated when new information was available. https://krebsonsecurity.com/2021/03/whistleblower-ubiquiti-breach-catastrophic/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/2021/03/whistleblower-ubiquiti-b... One thing that might be slightly comforting for customers is that Ubiquiti claims in the March 31 update (linked from the first article and quoted in the last comment on that article) that customer data was never mentioned in negotiations, although that is a specific detail not just who accessed the data. There are potentially some theoretical reasons someone attempting economic sabatage as an empoloyee might be less likely to access customer data (e.g. the average attacker might be more likely to be in a legal jurisdiction where they are unlikely to ever face a judge while an employee in the US may want to be able to tell a judge that they didn't access customer data if they get caught), but I wouldn't count on that at all or make any distinction about what to do based on the employment status of the person who accessed the data (if employees stealing data were less likely to release customer data in gerneral they might decide to do so for no other reason than to look less like an employee stealing data). Sounds like you took reasonable steps. Most if not all companies are breached at times, a company that has no disclosed breaches almost certainly just has a policy of never disclosing them.
- codedokode 5y agoWhat surprised me is that the company demands over $375000 (+ attorney fees) which is a several year income for an average person. But have you ever heard about a company being fined or sued for an amount equal to its several-year income? Also, as I understand, all Krebs has done is wrote "X told me about Y". How is that statement false, if X really contacted Krebs and told about Y?
- flutas 5y ago> Also, as I understand, all Krebs has done is wrote "X told me about Y". How is that statement false, if X really contacted Krebs and told about Y? My advice would be to read the actual complaint[0]. It goes into detail why they are doing this and their various points. The part that is interesting to me at least is Krebs intentionally labeling Sharp differently depending on the sentence in the same article. > 6. Krebs alternated his descriptions of Sharp, first he describes Sharp as a current employee. He then describes Sharp as a “former Ubiquiti developer” to deceive readers into believing that the sourcing for his original story was a legitimate source—someone other than Sharp. Krebs, therefore, intentionally concealed the fact that the only support for his reporting came from the very person who had just been indicted for hacking and attempted blackmail. [0]: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vaed.521759/gov.uscourts.vaed.521759.1.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vaed.52...
- joveian 5y agoIf you look at the screenshot they provide or the actual article: https://krebsonsecurity.com/2021/12/ubiquiti-developer-charged-with-extortion-causing-2020-breach/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/2021/12/ubiquiti-developer-charg... It is completely obvious to everyone that there is no deception here. Sharp was an employee at the time of the first article but presumably wasn't at the time of the second article (post arrest). The clear implication is that previous employee source was quite likely the preson arrested. The previous article contains a link near the top to the new information. This is purely Ubiquiti harassing Krebs, who does things by the book because he gets harassed all the time from all side.
- fmajid 5y agoI was waiting for the arrival of WiFi 6E APs from competitors before ditching my Ubiquiti setup, but may have to accelerate my migration away from them. I had already replaced my USG with an OpenBSD firewall and blocked all Ubiquiti devices from being able to connect to the Internet as a mitigation. Being cloud-free is a hard requirement for my network equipment.
- oger 5y agoMassive Streisand effect ahead in 3 - 2 - 1...