3 ms·
Of course they would like to avoid replacing every (affected) key they ever sold if they don't absolutely have to. But if they sold cars and this was a defectiv
by atoav 2y ago
Of course they would like to avoid replacing every (affected) key they ever sold if they don't absolutely have to. But if they sold cars and this was a defective airbag they would have been forced to replace them.
You as a manufacturer are responsible for the products you bring to market — don't want to recall your products? Then ensure they work and you don't put all your eggs in one basket.
In this case Yubico is very likely not legally bound to recall, but I made a case how this is an issue of trust. You know what would have been a good move? A deal where you can order a new one at strongly reduced prices if you can show you had an affected device, or something among those lines. Or selling the affected ones for cheap and give the customers the choice. There are many ways to deal with that situation in a better way than they did and they decided to choose the one that helped their very short term bottom line the most.
As a owner of an affected Yubikey I have to saybthat the whole episode put an questionmark behind thir product for me. Not because it was affected, because of how they dealt with it.
- palata 2y ago> in a better way than they did What did they do? What I see is that I can't choose to order a key with an older firmware, and it explicitly says "firmware 5.7" everywhere I look. > But if they sold cars and this was a defective airbag they would have been forced to replace them. New cars have those electronic keys that work remotely (automatically close the door when you leave, automatically open when you arrive). There has been an increase of car thefts from those keys, because they are objectively less secure. Have you ever tried asking the car manufacturer to change the key for free? Or to sell you a new car at a strongly reduced price?