3 ms·

Cool, I'd rather have a stamp that indicates a company will support their product for X number of years, and if they don't, they will release the software as OS

Cool, I'd rather have a stamp that indicates a company will support their product for X number of years, and if they don't, they will release the software as OSS so you can maintain yourself. I have an extremely expensive scale that came with wifi support and an app, only bought it 3 years ago, half the features already don't work because they nuked the app and stopped supporting the scale. did I need a smart scale? Absolutely not, and I don't really need any other "smart" devices the more I think about stuff like this, and now seek to buy "stupid" devices as much as possible. I'm not sure what such security stamps are supposed to provide other than false sense of security, as most things can be hacked eventually with enough determination or someone unknown zero day.

mxuribe 2y ago
Yeah, nowadays i try to buy many things that are "not smart" in order to avoid what you experienced with the smart scale. That being said, i wonder if what you're asking for is more on the warranty side, rather than security/promise side? To clarify, i am 100% in agreement with you that after a company stops supporting a product, they should open source it (which could create a secondary ecosystem of techs who offer services to support said open source software if a person is not inclined to manage the OSS themselves, etc.)...However, technically wouldn't a company's "promise" to support software be more like a warranty? And in that case, whatever gov. agency who oversees warranties would need to nudge business to comply...nevertheless both this cybermark, a warranty on software lifecycle, and other things are the LEAST that shoild exist nowadays.
- heresie-dabord 2y ago
  > try to buy many things that are "not smart" This is the best strategy, but let's be clear... consumers who make a purchase have a reasonable expectation of owning a durable product that does not increase the threat surface of consumers' lives. This means that the product requirements should be clear and the supply chain must be secure. Until a "trust label" can guarantee these principles, the proposal is just another prop in a grand security theatre.

mxuribe 2y ago

Yeah, nowadays i try to buy many things that are "not smart" in order to avoid what you experienced with the smart scale. That being said, i wonder if what you're asking for is more on the warranty side, rather than security/promise side? To clarify, i am 100% in agreement with you that after a company stops supporting a product, they should open source it (which could create a secondary ecosystem of techs who offer services to support said open source software if a person is not inclined to manage the OSS themselves, etc.)...However, technically wouldn't a company's "promise" to support software be more like a warranty? And in that case, whatever gov. agency who oversees warranties would need to nudge business to comply...nevertheless both this cybermark, a warranty on software lifecycle, and other things are the LEAST that shoild exist nowadays.

heresie-dabord 2y ago
> try to buy many things that are "not smart" This is the best strategy, but let's be clear... consumers who make a purchase have a reasonable expectation of owning a durable product that does not increase the threat surface of consumers' lives. This means that the product requirements should be clear and the supply chain must be secure. Until a "trust label" can guarantee these principles, the proposal is just another prop in a grand security theatre.