3 ms·

No. Critical system vulnerabilities are few and far between for most companies. Samsung has much greater than average occurrences of critical root level vulne

No. Critical system vulnerabilities are few and far between for most companies. Samsung has much greater than average occurrences of critical root level vulnerabilities.

Spark_Ed 4y ago
I've stopped buying anything Samsung because their quality control has become non-existant. My S22 ultra has a major bug that causes the screen to no longer update until I screenshot my way to the restart button. (Their response is trade in for an S23, but at my expense). I've never had a TV fail before, much less within two years. When I first put it together, it seemed like it was designed to fail. When they do, repair means either be charged $300 for a $10 fiber optic cable or $400 for a new output box. Any appliance repair person worth their salt would tell you to never buy Samsung appliances. They're the most prone to failure, most expensive to repair. They try to appeal to consumers by appearing like a luxury brand, while having bottom of the barrel engineering inside. I am avoiding anything Samsung until their track record turns around completely.
- lwhi 4y ago
  I've had absolutely no problem with my Samsung since the S8 ( followed by S10 plus, S22 plus)
SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
Possibly, but Samsung is the 2nd most popular phone manufacturer on the planet. It stands to reason that with the level of visibility they'd have a lot of eyes on them to find these things. That list provided at the top is also a bunch of different devices and entirely different types of electronics, which again is an argument that the bigger the market the more likely that something will be found.
kube-system 4y ago
The reason that most software does not have known vulnerabilities is not because it is secure, but because nobody has looked.
lwhi 4y ago
Yeah right .. I still remember when you could gain access to a MBPs root account using a blank password.
zamalek 4y ago
Even if it was common, 90 days without so much as a squeak? That is certainly incompetent cough uncommon.
ChuckNorris89 4y ago
>Samsung has much greater than average occurrences of critical root level vulnerabilities. I get it you dislike Samsung but citation needed for such claims other than "trust me bro". Also, since Samsung is possibly the world's biggest, or at least one of the biggest makers and sellers of electronics, serving a wide variety of markets and price points, it's inevitable that their name pops up more often than other brands. The target on your back from hackers and security researchers is proportional to your size as a company. Everyone would like to gloat they hacked a Samsung device. Nobody cares you hacked a TCL device. So a better metric would be severe vulnerabilities per number of devices sold .
- palata 4y ago
  IMO the metric should also consider how long it took them to patch it. Everyone has zero days, that's life. But there is no excuse for not patching a critical vulnerability.

No. Critical system vulnerabilities are few and far between for most companies. Samsung has much greater than average occurrences of critical root level vulnerabilities.

Spark_Ed 4y ago

I've stopped buying anything Samsung because their quality control has become non-existant. My S22 ultra has a major bug that causes the screen to no longer update until I screenshot my way to the restart button. (Their response is trade in for an S23, but at my expense). I've never had a TV fail before, much less within two years. When I first put it together, it seemed like it was designed to fail. When they do, repair means either be charged $300 for a $10 fiber optic cable or $400 for a new output box. Any appliance repair person worth their salt would tell you to never buy Samsung appliances. They're the most prone to failure, most expensive to repair. They try to appeal to consumers by appearing like a luxury brand, while having bottom of the barrel engineering inside. I am avoiding anything Samsung until their track record turns around completely.

lwhi 4y ago
I've had absolutely no problem with my Samsung since the S8 ( followed by S10 plus, S22 plus)

SketchySeaBeast 4y ago

Possibly, but Samsung is the 2nd most popular phone manufacturer on the planet. It stands to reason that with the level of visibility they'd have a lot of eyes on them to find these things. That list provided at the top is also a bunch of different devices and entirely different types of electronics, which again is an argument that the bigger the market the more likely that something will be found.

kube-system 4y ago

The reason that most software does not have known vulnerabilities is not because it is secure, but because nobody has looked.

lwhi 4y ago

Yeah right .. I still remember when you could gain access to a MBPs root account using a blank password.

zamalek 4y ago

Even if it was common, 90 days without so much as a squeak? That is certainly incompetent cough uncommon.

ChuckNorris89 4y ago

>Samsung has much greater than average occurrences of critical root level vulnerabilities. I get it you dislike Samsung but citation needed for such claims other than "trust me bro". Also, since Samsung is possibly the world's biggest, or at least one of the biggest makers and sellers of electronics, serving a wide variety of markets and price points, it's inevitable that their name pops up more often than other brands. The target on your back from hackers and security researchers is proportional to your size as a company. Everyone would like to gloat they hacked a Samsung device. Nobody cares you hacked a TCL device. So a better metric would be severe vulnerabilities per number of devices sold .

palata 4y ago
IMO the metric should also consider how long it took them to patch it. Everyone has zero days, that's life. But there is no excuse for not patching a critical vulnerability.