Slashdot Mirror


Netgear's Amusing "fix" for WG602v1 Backdoor

An anonymous reader writes "Recently Slashdot reported that the Netgear router has as WLAN backdoor. According to this report by the news service of the German publisher Heise Netgear "fixed" the problem with a firmware update. And what is the fix? According to Heise, they didn't remove the backdoor at all. Instead they just changed the login information! They replaced the old user name 'super' with 'superman', and changed the old password to '21241036'. "

515 comments

  1. Oops... by danielrm26 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Chalk up another loss for 'security by obscurity'.

    --
    dmiessler.com -- grep understanding knowledge
    1. Re:Oops... by einhverfr · · Score: 5, Informative

      Chalk up another loss for 'security by obscurity'.

      Well, that might be good enough, if they could choose the login information. But now that they published it....

      First rule of passwords is that you don't talk about your passwords....

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    2. Re:Oops... by isthisthingon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why are companies allowed to get away with this crap just because we pay them for their shoddy wares?

      Any open source coder would be summarily flogged for such a transgression. Why on EARTH is this not literally considered a criminal offense for a company to do?

      And I for one used to hold Netgear in reasonably high regard, too.

      Never again.

      --
      And then one day you find, ten years have gone behind you....
    3. Re:Oops... by Petrol · · Score: 4, Funny

      What's the second rule?

      --
      ...and that's the end of our show. Donk!
    4. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Second rule: See first rule.

    5. Re:Oops... by AndroidCat · · Score: 5, Funny

      If someone war-chalks it up, it won't be obscure for long. What is the symbol for "lame gateway security"?

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    6. Re:Oops... by djansen · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, it IS an improvement. The increase from 5 characters for the login to 8 now makes it SO much harder to crack. What was the old password? Someone do the math and figure out the number of new permutations they've added. Ha. I bet this is how the guy who did it justified the whole thing.

      "What da ya mean? It's MUCH more secure than it was before."

      Doh.

    7. Re:Oops... by chris_mahan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      >Why are companies allowed to get away with this crap just because we pay them for their shoddy wares?

      The answer lies within the question: Because we pay them.

      If someone paid you to paint a building and didn't care whether you stripped off the old paint first, I guarantee you you would just slap a coat over the old paint.

      >And I for one used to hold Netgear in reasonably high regard, too.

      Your mistake, then.

      >Never again.

      You should not say never if you want to reach them. This just makes the company execs think that since they can never reach you as a customer again, they won't make the effort. What you should say instead is: "I will purchase products from other companies since theirs do not address my needs at this time."

      This is reasonable to them, and they won't discount you as a hot-head but rather may take your advice.

      Just my .016 euro

      --

      "Piter, too, is dead."

    8. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      What is the symbol for "lame gateway security"?

      This, obviously.

    9. Re:Oops... by corbettw · · Score: 1

      I don't remember. That's the second thing they teach you.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    10. Re:Oops... by NickFortune · · Score: 4, Funny
      In future I will purchase products from other companies since theirs do not address my needs at this time.

      I feel better for that...

      --
      Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
    11. Re:Oops... by callipygian-showsyst · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      And another reason companies shouldn't rely on H1-B talent or offshore programmers!

    12. Re:Oops... by div_2n · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My experience with Netgear products has led me to believe their quality has diminished dramatically.

      IANAL, but I seem to recall a lawyer I know telling me that with product liability, a company is liable if due diligence is not performed to fix an issue when a known problem exists. Of course, the trick becomes can you call changing a username and password due diligence? I feel certain every computer expert in the world would say no.

    13. Re:Oops... by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why on EARTH is this not literally considered a criminal offense for a company to do?

      Just how many criminal laws do you think we need? Seriously. Do you think we need another one?

      There's no doubt in my mind that the vendor would be held liable for damages if anybody were harmed--financially I mean--by this kind of thing. But should somebody really go to jail over it?

      Geez. And I thought I was a fascist.

      --

      I write in my journal
    14. Re:Oops... by D-Cypell · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well... if there is one thing that can be said of slashdot... we certainly know how to fix that pesky 'obscurity' problem ;o)

    15. Re:Oops... by timeOday · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Why are companies allowed to get away with this crap just because we pay them for their shoddy wares?
      The answer lies within the question: Because we pay them.
      Don't blame this on consumers. We don't have real choice until we have the relevant information. Things might be quite different with a bit of truth in advertising, like a sticker on the box which reads "Router WG602 - Now With Even More Backdoors!"

      The question of "why are companies allowed to get away with this crap" is a good one. They should either be forced to tell people what they're buying, or be accountable for the consequences of deception.

    16. Re:Oops... by chris_mahan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do you shop around for cars? Do you drive a few, ask your friends/coworkers before you decide what kind of Toyota to get?

      --

      "Piter, too, is dead."

    17. Re:Oops... by gfxguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Your last line says it all - they should be held accountable. If it's advertised as being secure, and a backdoor is found, they should have to buy back every single unit or replace every single unit with a working one.

      If anyone has been damaged by the availability of the back door they should be held liable even if they claim you waive that right in their license agreement (their license agreement does not state there may be the possibility of back doors, no?)

      If you claim something is secure, but that you can't prevent all future attacks so you can't be liable, that's one thing, but when the liability is clearly your fault, it's another.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    18. Re:Oops... by BhAaD · · Score: 0

      What's the second rule? Second rule of passwords: Don't talk about your passwords!

    19. Re:Oops... by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      "Any open source coder would be summarily flogged for such a transgression. Why on EARTH is this not literally considered a criminal offense for a company to do?"

      Perhaps because of the audiences they cater to. People who use OSS tend to be more technically knowledgable, and something like this would be a much bigger deal for them since they rely solely on reputation to get their product out there.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    20. Re:Oops... by gfxguy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The fact that the backdoor existed at all makes them liable, IMO, because it proactively defeats the supposed security they used to sell their product.

      Normally you'd find them liable if they showed negligence, but in this case they themselves proactively introduced the security risk. It's worse then merely being negligent.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    21. Re:Oops... by Flamingcheeze · · Score: 1

      I prefer to just let them die at the indifferent hands of the free market. It's the best equalizer known to man.

      --
      The Philosophy of Liberty | lewrockwell.com
    22. Re:Oops... by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      I agree. This would more likely be a civil case, and IMO Netgear should be required to buy back every single unit.

      Unfortunately, this would only happen with a class action, and where would the lawyers get their $10 million in fees for their 5 hours of work?

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    23. Re:Oops... by chegosaurus · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't choose "password".

    24. Re:Oops... by isthisthingon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Good point. It is the fact that something is by most anyone's notion "unfixable" by the average end user to protect themselves that makes it so disagreeable in our eyes. It seems a bit like a car company recalling cars because of faulty parts then replacing those faulty parts with other faulty parts.

      As consumers we can, and do, put our money where our mouths are. Fine indeed. At what point though are companies really held accountable? Much later to their shareholders for dropped profits? No one will ever tie the two events together.

      I agree it may be a bit over the top to say criminal offense, but at some point, at some point, this type of product negligence really is just that.

      --
      And then one day you find, ten years have gone behind you....
    25. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The answer lies within the question: Because we pay them.

      If someone paid you to paint a building and didn't care whether you stripped off the old paint first, I guarantee you you would just slap a coat over the old paint.


      Bullshit. I (and I am sure plenty of others) would strip off the paint first, not because the customer was coughing up the check regardless of asking (and, might I point out that my price would reflect paint stripping as part of the cost) but because I wanted to provide quality results. And I would be especially interested in delivering quality results so that I could demonstrate to other customers how good my service was.

      Granted, many companies do follow the parent's logic - but most of those are out of business in short order. If netgear keeps this up, hopefully the market will treat them likewise.

    26. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      If they drove a Toyota, they wouldn't be my friends.

    27. Re:Oops... by Enigma_Man · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But the masses don't know better. The free market isn't "geeks who know better" unfortunately. Best Buy and Circuit City will continue to sell these to people who just need something that "works".

      -Jesse

      --
      Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
    28. Re:Oops... by R.Caley · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Why are companies allowed to get away with this crap just because we pay them for their shoddy wares?

      You answered your own question. If everyone who owns one of these took it back and demanded their money back because it is not suitable for the purpose for which it was sold, they'd soon get the message.

      Why on EARTH is this not literally considered a criminal offense for a company to do?

      Because the civil courts are there to cope with this kind of thing?

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    29. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think you are facist? Thats a little wierd, don't you think?

    30. Re:Oops... by stienman · · Score: 1

      What you should say instead is: "I will purchase products from other companies since theirs do not address my needs at this time."

      I said, "Someone set up us the password. You have no chance to survive make your time since your products do not my needs fit presently."

      But that's just me.

      In all seriousness, it would be a pity to find that the netgear engineers, programmers, and other employees all used netgear products at a discount. I bet they live near netgear facilities, and use netgear email addresses. I'd hate to see their routers flashed with a less efficient firmware. Hopefully no one will take advantage of their precarious position.

      -Adam

    31. Re:Oops... by JGski · · Score: 1

      Their solution here probably won't qualify as "due diligence" I think. :-) Let the lawyers be unleashed!

    32. Re:Oops... by stienman · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The interesting thing about liability is that if they have some control over your routers, then you can hold them more liable than if they had no control. Further, now that everyone knows they can 'dial in' then hopefully customers will pester them to fix their products remotely instead of spending hours on the phone. In the end a backdoor is *much* more work than a product without one.

      Silly programmer, backdoors are for script kiddies.

      -Adam

    33. Re:Oops... by Cybrr · · Score: 1

      If someone paid you to paint a building and didn't care whether you stripped off the old paint first, I guarantee you you would just slap a coat over the old paint.

      I think a better analogy would be: "If you paid someone to paint a building, as you trust they will do a better job, I guarantee you you would install an extra hidden door at your discretion."

      --
      Why did GEAR crush RDP?
    34. Re:Oops... by worst_name_ever · · Score: 4, Funny
      What's the second rule?

      I don't know, but I know Rule 8: If this is your first login, you have to change your password.

      --

      In Soviet Rush, today's Tom Sawyer gets high on you.
    35. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's probably because you're a mechanic.

    36. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Granted, many companies do follow the parent's logic - but most of those are out of business in short order

      That must be why the entire market is composed of such companies.

    37. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Can I change it to "password"?

    38. Re:Oops... by Fjord · · Score: 5, Funny

      The first rule of passwords is that you do not talk about your passwords.
      The second rule of passwords is that you do not talk about your passwords.
      The third rule is if someone uses "password" or nothing, there is no password.
      The fourth rule is only one person to a password.
      The fifth rule is one password at a time.
      The sixth rule is no sheets, no stickies.
      The seventh rule is password will be expired when they have to

      and the final rule of passwords is, if it's your first logon, you have to set one.

      --
      -no broken link
    39. Re:Oops... by chrispl · · Score: 4, Funny

      Be realistic, if the box DID have a sticker saying "Router WG602 - Now With Even More Backdoors!" most Joe-BestBuy-Consumers would flip it over and look for little doors on the back of it.

      Face it, until there is a major disaster involving IT security most of this type of information will remain the exclusive domain of security geeks and haxors.

      --
      What post? The one you're carrying inside your rusty innards!
    40. Re:Oops... by Flamingcheeze · · Score: 1
      "The free market isn't "geeks who know better" unfortunately."

      I don't have a problem with that. Buyer beware, a fool and his money, yadda yadda.

      While everyone else is watching American Idol and getting dumber, I'm keeping myself informed and educated so that I can make smart purchases (reading /. is one of the things I do to stay informed... now I'll avoid Netgear products until they shape up). It's not for me to worry if they blow their money on junk.

      --
      The Philosophy of Liberty | lewrockwell.com
    41. Re:Oops... by arivanov · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I do.

      In fact I drove all possible candidates for several days before I bought what I have now. It is quite easy. Every time you go on a holiday rent one of the candidates for "next thing to buy". You get to see it in all of its "glory" - lowest spec, run down by tourists and badly maintained. If it is still OK you go and buy it. You may suffer some minor discomfort compared to renting "the old familiar", but you save a lot of money :-)

      I also do the same stuff with computer equipment. Buy, test drive if it is shit - return. It is quite easy to do it in EU due to distance selling regulations. You are entitled to a free return no questions asked of anything you have bought over phone or Internet within 1 week after purchase. This limits you to internt purchases, but once you add this along with observations of company kit you are reasonably well positioned to get the right stuff...

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    42. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you put it through safety tests yourself? Or do you trust other people to do that for you?

    43. Re:Oops... by Sepper · · Score: 1

      Why are companies allowed to get away with this crap just because we pay them for their shoddy wares?

      Because It Takes a Lot Less Time and Most People Won't Notice the Difference Until It's Too Late.

      --
      I live in Soviet Canuckistan you insensitive clod!
    44. Re:Oops... by the_demiurge · · Score: 1

      How is the "free market" as an equalizer going to fix this problem if, as you say, "everyone else" wants junk routers?

      Won't supply and demand dictate that the junk wins out? Responsible companies can't make money selling routers to just you.

    45. Re:Oops... by timeOday · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The whole notion of making buying decisions carefully is irrelevant if companies are dishonest about what their products do. Sure, if you're lucky somebody like heise will eventually shed some light so you can make informed decisions. Until the truth is known, you can't act on it no matter how vigilant you are. The geek world at large was just as surprised as anybody else when it turned out that Cisco had been selling products with backdoors.

    46. Re:Oops... by megarich · · Score: 1

      This is a little off topic but same idea applies, basically this sh*t is getting ridiculous. Our company recently ordered a very expensive network tape drive(2 of them). One they didnt even include a freakin instruction manual with the damn thing(they send 2 cdroms of instruction later) so we didn't know how to configure it and 2)one unit was defective and we had to hassle them to pay for shipping on their shoddy product. I have no control over these purchases(don't give me that power yet) but it just angers me because it almost seems universal now. Companies don't want to responsiblilty for there shitty service/product and unfortunately the consumer suffers! Oh wel..say la vi.....

    47. Re:Oops... by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 2, Funny

      Rule 2 - No Pooftahs

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
    48. Re:Oops... by megarich · · Score: 1

      pardon my crappy grammer, i need to learn how to proof read better ;)

    49. Re:Oops... by Sir+dies+alot · · Score: 1

      Number of Permutations:
      For 5 letter passwords: 6590815232
      For 8 letter passwords: 5132188731375616
      Total number of new permutations: 5132182140560384
      End Result: just as insecure as before, because everyone knew the password before, and now everyone knows again. The permutations could be infinite for all it matters, now that its been posted, its no more difficult.

      By the way the above calculations were done assuming 92 different characters for each letter/number/symbol in the password. a-z, A-Z, 0-9, and 30 different junk characters that /. wont let me post.

      --
      The stupidity of your average American is just about the same as the average European, we simply show it off better.
    50. Re:Oops... by me.at.work · · Score: 1
      Things might be quite different with a bit of truth in advertising, like a sticker on the box which reads "Router WG602 - Now With Even More Backdoors!"


      This would indeed make for interesting marketing campains:

      Barlboro - the only deathfag that's GUARANTEED to give you cancer in only 3 months! Think your lung's are BLACK? Think again!

      Schmirnoff - now with MANDATORY memory loss and liverdamage!

      Micorfsot Internet exploder - UNSAFE at ANY speed. Hey, WE don't use it! .. and of course we'd all still be buying the crap.
    51. Re:Oops... by vingilot · · Score: 1

      "Router WG602 - Now With Even More Backdoors!"

      might attract the wrong crowd

    52. Re:Oops... by Flamingcheeze · · Score: 1
      How is Linux going to do anything for the world if everyone else wants Windows? The rules of supply and demand don't have to work instantaneously, but they will always work eventually.

      The real danger in our "free market" is that it's not really free. We have far too much government meddling in the markets. Step one is to eliminate government meddling.

      --
      The Philosophy of Liberty | lewrockwell.com
    53. Re:Oops... by jrvz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      US law includes the concept of "reasonable expectation of privacy". We badly need a "reasonable expectation of security".

    54. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Netgeer's just helping everyone become a "common carrier status" -
      Defendant: "but judge, the prOn got there because I use a Netgear router"
      Judge: "Ok. Cool."

    55. Re:Oops... by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      It's a good idea to purchase routers that are based on Linux. With the source code you can fix any problems yourself.

    56. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a perfect example of why users rebel against passwords.

      Passwords can't be written down.
      Passwords can't be trivial.
      Passwords change from time to time.
      Every system has its own rules.
      Every system has its own expiration schedule.

      Oh hell. I'm gonna use password for my password.

    57. Re:Oops... by TyrranzzX · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Agreed. I like to use the pair of pants example. I can pick up a pair of pants and see what it's made of; the quality of the stiching, weither it's double or triple stiched, the quality of the fabric, dye, etc. Even with military camo, you've got different patterns, different fabrics and synthetics, etc.

      When I go down to the military surplus store, I can refuse to buy clothing wrapped in boxes and bags, because I don't get to see them. Instead, I go to the shelves and take a good look at what's on the shelf.

      When I head down to the store to pick up a router, however, I'm only told which standards it's complaint with, not what it's capable of doing. I can't see the soldering, the capacitor branding, the capacitor capacitance tolerance and what range that tolerance is in. I can't take a look at the source to know weither or not someone can get in.

      Inotherwords, all the pants in the military surplus store are in boxes I can't, by law, open up. I can use the pants, I just can't inspect them for flaws. I can see the box is labeled "surplus military pants 30/70, Chocolate chip camo pattern" but I can't open up the box to see.

      CEO's just don't care; they want to maximise the profit to their investor, and to do that, they've got to crank out a whole lot of shitty product and sell it super expensive.

    58. Re:Oops... by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 1

      This would more likely be a civil case, and IMO Netgear should be required to buy back every single unit.

      No, that wouldn't be just. Compensatory damages: sure. Punative damages? Doubtful. But forcing them to do something like that? Forget it. That'd be completely outside the realm of justice or equity.

      --

      I write in my journal
    59. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Because it's trivial for the average linux user to debug the original router application, which may or may not come with source code, fix it, cross-compile onto a RISC arch, etc, ...

    60. Re:Oops... by cynic10508 · · Score: 1

      I hear Kerkhoff spinning in his grave.

    61. Re:Oops... by Nevo · · Score: 1

      Companies can get away with this crap precisely because consumers pay for it.

      When consumers stop paying for it, companies will stop producing shoddy crap.

      Although I wouldn't be in the least surprise if this could be part of a lawsuit. (Hard for me to imagine it part of a criminal case, however.)

    62. Re:Oops... by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      I can't tell... are you being facetious? If they can't fix the product, then buying back every single unit IS compensatory.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    63. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the 2nd rule is the first password you think of sucks.

      or was it "i know your password so it doesn't matter what you set it to, and you password sucks"

      maybe it was just 'your password sucks'

    64. Re:Oops... by Sideshow+Coward · · Score: 1
      The eighth rule is ???
      The ninth rule is profit.

      Sorry.... someone had to say it.

    65. Re:Oops... by raulzero · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't know about the second rule... Third rule: Profit.

    66. Re:Oops... by jskline · · Score: 1

      Quick...
      How many criminals does it take to mess up a marketing promotion?

      One. He's the guy that gets promoted to CFO in the next elections!...

      --
      All content in this message is copyright (c) 2008. All rights reserved. RIAA is prohibited here.
    67. Re:Oops... by Grant_Watson · · Score: 2, Informative

      "This is a perfect example of why users rebel against passwords."

      While the grandparent makes some good points, you do realize that he/she/it was parodying Fight Club, right? Right?? I mean, I got it and I haven't even seen the movie. ;-)

      Still, you do have to realize that the safeguards against which you rail -- the ones that you're saying make users lazy -- are put in place because users are lazy in the first place.

    68. Re:Oops... by Fjord · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah, I don't think people got it. 70% informative my ass. FWIW, this is the source I used. I don't have the rules of fight club memorized.

      I would have swore the first two lines and the last line would have given it away tho.

      --
      -no broken link
    69. Re:Oops... by mystkdragon · · Score: 1
      Why are companies allowed to get away with this crap just because we pay them for their shoddy wares?
      The answer lies within the question: Because we pay them.

      I understand that is an easy escape, but this assumes in many cases that there is a choice. From a large corporate standpoint, security managers aren't always privy to the golf outings where large purchases of garbage hardware is bought because someone's CIO missed their chip on the 13th.
      In my case, we have execs and higher dropping POs in our email box saying 'Hey, saw this and picked up a few, they say it will increase ROI'

      For someone in my shoes, the fact that a large corporate supplier would have such stupid public practices scares me... It's like finding out that your CTO and CIO are flying to Utah to talk to SCO.... scary.

      --
      Sometimes one pays most for the things one gets for nothing. -- Albert Einstein
    70. Re:Oops... by chris_mahan · · Score: 1

      That's a management issue. Like all management issues, nothing gets done until there is an enormous and highly publicized break-in.

      --

      "Piter, too, is dead."

    71. Re:Oops... by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 1

      If they can't fix the product, then buying back every single unit IS compensatory.

      Uh, no. "Compensatory damages" are monies paid out in compensation for harm. That is, the damages cover the cost to the harmed party associated with the harm.

      Compensatory damages don't involve "buying back" anything. And forcing a vendor to "buy back" product would be wildly disproportionate to the harm.

      --

      I write in my journal
    72. Re:Oops... by Janek+Kozicki · · Score: 4, Funny

      one password to rule them all,
      one password to find them,
      one password to bring them all
      and in the darkness bind them

      oh wait... shouldn't people use more than one password?

      --
      #
      #\ @ ? Colonize Mars
      #
    73. Re:Oops... by DaveJay · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I did the same thing. Was going to buy a specific car, and my wife and I loved it during the test drive -- so we rented one for a week's road trip. By the end of the first day, we HATED it, and couldn't wait to return it.

      We then rented the car we ultimately bought, and it's been so good to us, she's still got the first one, I bought a second one, and I have since traded it in for a high-performance version of the same. Whee!

      And no, I'm not going to tell you the cars, but I'll give you a hint: the one we hated rhymes with bored locus, and the one we love (sort of) rhymes with grease-on ben-tra. Hard to rhyme with car names that are invented words. Heh.

    74. Re:Oops... by mystkdragon · · Score: 1

      Is there legal accountability for such a blatantly obvious security flaw with apparent complete disregard for potential loss of income due to break-in?
      --matt

      --
      Sometimes one pays most for the things one gets for nothing. -- Albert Einstein
    75. Re:Oops... by TYC · · Score: 1
      In Soviet Rush, today's Tom Sawyer gets high on you.

      If you're gonna do the damned "Soviet" joke, at least get the meme right!

      In Soviet Rush, YOU get high on today's Tom Sawyer!

      See... ...reverse the subject and the object, emphasize the new subject, and end with an exclamation point as if you said something unbelievably clever.

    76. Re:Oops... by gfxguy · · Score: 3, Informative

      They do (or should) involve buying back a defective product as buying that product (under false pretenses) is financially harmful to the company that bought them.

      I don't see how forcing a company to take a defective product back and returning the purchasers money is "wildy disproportionate." It's seems exactly proportionate, no more, no less.

      If I sold computers that didn't work as advertised, and the consumer was out $200 for it, then giving them a coupon for $5 off their next purchase is hardly compensatory. Compensatory... I need to compensate them. They spent $200 for a product that did not work as advertised...

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    77. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      No, the average user can just find some expert that can do that, and offer them a blowjob for it.

    78. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tongue in cheek, actually. Twirlip is one of the most notable (and rare) conservatives on slashdot. People often label him (and other conservatives) with the title "fascist."

    79. Re:Oops... by rar · · Score: 1

      Third rule of passwords is:
      DON'T use your pet's name as password.

      or more elegantly expressed:
      "left to their own ways, some people will still use cute doggie names as passwords" // Grammp, F. T., and R. H. Morris. 'UNIX Operating System Security.'

    80. Re:Oops... by gnu-generation-one · · Score: 1

      "Face it, until there is a major disaster involving IT security most of this type of information will remain the exclusive domain of security geeks and haxors."

      There are other types of people?

    81. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DON'T use your pet's name as password.

      Damn, now I have to change combination on my luggage again...

    82. Re:Oops... by PetoskeyGuy · · Score: 2, Funny

      (NG)
      super

      -or-

      (NG)
      superman

    83. Re:Oops... by Syntax+Heir · · Score: 1

      Hooray for eliminating government meddling!!

      I'll go so far as to say emlinate government involvement altogehter!

      Quick, think of your 'favorite' government provided program? HA!

      --
      The greatest hindrance to success is a well-rationalized excuse
    84. Re:Oops... by fallen1 · · Score: 2, Funny
      What is the symbol for "lame gateway security"?

      I think that is the middle finger extended while all other fingers are retracted. Usually used by large corporations towards small consumers when said consumers find out the product they have purchased is shit and have complained to said large corporation... but I guess it'll work just as well in this case. ;-)

      --

      Dream as if you'll live forever.
      Live as if you'll die tomorrow.
      ~Anonymous~

    85. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flamebait it may be, but these were offshore programmers.

    86. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "What is the symbol for "lame gateway security"?"

      Right here

    87. Re:Oops... by coldguy · · Score: 2, Funny

      if anyone needs their router fixed, let me know.

    88. Re:Oops... by trueguru · · Score: 1

      Alfred E. Newman pic seems appropriate

      --
      for crying out loud
    89. Re:Oops... by Aexia · · Score: 1

      Quick, think of your 'favorite' government provided program? HA!

      The Internet?

      Or maybe the military. Interstate highways. Public libraries. Fire department. Police department.

      I'll go so far as to say emlinate government involvement altogehter!

      Because if there's one thing we've learned, it's that corporations can be trusted to act ethnically and honestly in the absense of gov't oversight.

    90. Re:Oops... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      I'm not exactly disagreeing with you, but...

      We've never seen corporations acting without government oversight. My personal expectation is that they would evolve into something remarkably similar to governments. (And even to "republics" of a sort, where the citizens were the shareholders.)

      As a partial reason for this may I cite the historical precedent of "The Lord Mayor and Corporation of London". This isn't a good example, it's merely the best I've been able to come up with. The Lord Mayor was required because contemporaneous feudal lords would only respect their own kind, so they needed a lord as titular head. (More than titular, actually, but the citizenry only needed him for titular reasons. He got more because of his bargaining position.)

      OTOH, I'm quite willing to believe that the development might be mathematically chaotic, in which case it's hard to predict what would happen.

      But do remember that corporations are only restricted to their charters (to the extent that they are) and to fiscal honesty (to the extent that they are) by the external authority of the govt. If you remove that, some other check will come into play, but under what conditions it is difficult to predict.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    91. Re:Oops... by cOdEgUru · · Score: 1

      Oh Ok. So you hated Ford Focus and bought a Nissan Sentra. Huh?!

      Oh! We werent supposed to say that out loud? Are we hunting terrorists now???

    92. Re:Oops... by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 1

      buying that product (under false pretenses) is financially harmful to the company that bought them

      Wrong. Merely owning the product is not, in and of itself, harmful. Owning a defective product merely presents a potential harm. You haven't actually been harmed, so no compensatory damages can be applied.

      I don't see how forcing a company to take a defective product back and returning the purchasers money is "wildy disproportionate."

      Well, start with the phrase "forcing to" and see if you can't figure it out.

      If I sold computers that didn't work as advertised

      I'm sorry, but at what point did we start talking about things that "didn't work as advertised?" Netgear made no such assurances. In fact, I'm quite certain that they indemnified themselves thoroughly.

      --

      I write in my journal
    93. Re:Oops... by chris_mahan · · Score: 1

      No, of course. However, there is the notion that if your clients are sued, the suer may sue the equipment manufacturer for loss, if the defendent is unable to pay much. but, IANAL and IDPOOTVE ("I don't play one on TV either" for the initialism challenged)

      --

      "Piter, too, is dead."

    94. Re:Oops... by pyrrhonist · · Score: 2, Funny
      Third rule of passwords is: DON'T use your pet's name as password.

      No way! I always use my cat's name, "qx5Rt8klV95fgEr5", as a password. Of course, I change her name every month.

      --
      Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
    95. Re:Oops... by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      How does "forcing" a company to do something automatically mean it's "wildly disproportionate"? That makes no sense. If the government "forces" you to pay back the people you commited fraud against, is it "wildly disproportionate"?

      I'm sorry, but at what point did we start talking about things that "didn't work as advertised?" Netgear made no such assurances. In fact, I'm quite certain that they indemnified themselves thoroughly.

      The difference is that a responsible party at the company knew there was a back door. Just as you are sure they "indemnified" themselves, I'm also sure they advertised the devices as having security features. There's a reason it's called a "back door". If a security company advertised they'd lock up all the openings in my house, but still couldn't guarantee someone would break in, I'd accept that as reasonable - how could they possibly? But if they then leave the back door wide open, they have through proactive negligence put my property at risk. If I paid them $200 to do it, it is not wildly disproportionate, nor unreasonable, to ask for that money back - or for them to replace the security in the house with a system that works. That's what I paid for.

      So when I say they should buy every unit back, it's with the assumption that they can't easily replace that one with the open back door - otherwise they would have. Otherwise I'd just have them release a firmware patch to fix it. Since they obviously can't do that, asking them to replace the defective merchandise is not out of line. The first step to replacing it is taking back their stuff that doesn't work as advertised.

      I'm not asking for compensation from damages caused; like you said, no one that I know of has claimed any loss; I'm asking for compensation for the product they sold that features a known security by-pass that THEY put there ON PURPOSE and without telling their customers.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    96. Re:Oops... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Sir, your sig is the funniest thing I've seen in a long time on slashdot. :P

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    97. Re:Oops... by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      The sixth rule is no sheets, no stickies.

      Is this rule anything like "No tickee, no shirtee?"

      Or is that Kerboros?

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    98. Re:Oops... by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1


      Well, since Windows trolls think the "average" Linux user is someone to the "right" (whatever that means) of Linus...yes.

      OTOH, Windows trolls expect "Grandma" (their OTHER stereotype) to never care that NetGear has an obvious password.

      And they think that's wonderful. That's their target market. They think Bill is a genius for pandering to that level of ignorance.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    99. Re:Oops... by ncc74656 · · Score: 1
      What's the second rule?

      You do not talk about your passwords.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    100. Re:Oops... by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 1

      I wish I could take credit for it, but I stole it from the lovely people at T-Shirt Hell

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
    101. Re:Oops... by mrscorpio · · Score: 1

      Why did you waste your time dancing around the issue, making it plainly obvious to anyone what you mean when you could have just come out and said it?

    102. Re:Oops... by Syntax+Heir · · Score: 1
      The Internet?

      Actually DARPA is one of the FEW unmolested departments in the government. They operate nearly independent of the bureaucracy at large.

      Or maybe the military. Interstate highways. Public libraries. Fire department. Police department.

      I should've been more clear and said FEDERAL government. Military, Currency, Courts, Infrastructure (i.e. Interstate Highways) I will concede are 'federal' duties. Fire and police departments are state & local authority, same with libraries.

      I'm not opposed to state and local government it's FEDERAL involvement that is out of control. I should've been more specific. However, to think that ANY government be it federal or state will act ethically or honestly is equally naive.

      --
      The greatest hindrance to success is a well-rationalized excuse
    103. Re:Oops... by bellers · · Score: 3, Funny

      >>What is the symbol for "lame gateway security"?

      Last time I checked it, was a flag that sort of looked like a window...

      --
      This space for rent.
    104. Re:Oops... by ghjm · · Score: 1

      Well, yes. You're absolutely right. Absent external oversight, if corporations are the only entity capable of exercising authority, then they become a de facto government. That's really pretty obvious.

      The question is, would that be good government? Would that be a government you want to live under?

      These 'all government is bad so dismantle everything' types always seem to forget that whatever you dismantle will be replaced by something else, and if you aren't paying attention then the something else will be worse.

      Instead, what about working to establish good government?

      -Graham

    105. Re:Oops... by ACPosterChild · · Score: 1

      No, it's not compensatory, but it's exactly what happens all the time in the US.

      RIAA was charging twice what they should have been for CDs for years? Well, if you could show a receipt proving you purchased a CD in a certain time frame, you got a check for $13. If you could prove that you bought 300 CDs in those years, you still only got $13; they keep the extra $377 they bilked you out of.

      Same thing for MS, big tobacco, all large businesses.

      Basically, if you sell one person a known piece of shit, you give them all their money back if they return it for being a piece of shit. If you sell 1 million people pieces of shit, you have them keep their pieces of shit and send them a gift card for about 10% of the sale price. Gotta love this country, where it's legitmate to complain to the courts that paying too large a fine will hurt your business model.

    106. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the -uh nevermind...

    107. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks - I wish I had mod points.

    108. Re:Oops... by mrogers · · Score: 1

      If the OS is burned onto a ROM chip inside the router it doesn't really matter whether you have the source.

    109. Re:Oops... by Frizzle+Fry · · Score: 1
      Fire and police departments are state & local authority, same with libraries.

      Really? Because I found this library that certainly claims to be under the authority of the Federal governemnt. They seem to be a rather large library, too.
      --
      I'd rather be lucky than good.
    110. Re:Oops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Soviet Rush, today's Tom Sawyer gets high on you.

      If you're gonna do the damned "Soviet" joke, at least get the meme right!

      In Soviet Rush, YOU get high on today's Tom Sawyer!

      See... ...reverse the subject and the object, emphasize the new subject, and end with an exclamation point as if you said something unbelievably clever.


      or it would help if you were familiar with the rush song called tom sawyer, cos then you might realize that his .sig already is clever...

    111. Re:Oops... by mandalayx · · Score: 1

      Don't blame this on consumers. We don't have real choice until we have the relevant information.

      Then go find some relevant information before you buy the product. Now that you have the relevant information about Netgear, if you don't trust Netgear anymore, don't buy their products.

      Every time you buy a product, a service, whatever, there is an implied risk that it won't turn out the way you like it. Tough shit. Take responsibility for your own actions.

    112. Re:Oops... by timeOday · · Score: 1
      Then go find some relevant information before you buy the product.
      If that were possible we wouldn't be having this discussion.
      Now that you have the relevant information about Netgear, if you don't trust Netgear anymore, don't buy their products.
      Millions already bought their products.
      Every time you buy a product, a service, whatever, there is an implied risk that it won't turn out the way you like it. Tough shit. Take responsibility for your own actions.
      Interesting how in the same breath you can be so big on personal responsibility (even for things the consumer has no control over), yet totally dismiss corporate responsibility (even for things the corporation did intentionally). Why the discrepancy?
    113. Re:Oops... by Syntax+Heir · · Score: 1

      There are a lot of things that ARE but necessarily shouldn't be. I'm sure I'll catch hell for this but, according to the letter of the Constitution federally funded (i.e. public schools) are not authorized. Retirement (Social Security) should not be a federal matter yet somehow is.

      The Constitution is very clear on the limits of the federal government. The feds are responsible to provide a national defense, a common currency, a court/justice system and certain infrastructure. (Interstates, dams, bridges, a certain amount of disaster relief etc.) Everything else including libraries (I don't care what written on the building) are explicitly NOT federal affairs and are quite honestly a misuse of public funds.

      Continuing on in the same fashion, crime is largely none of the fed's businesses either. The Constitution names only three crimes specifically, Treason, Counterfeiting and Piracy. So all those fancy court cases that get so much publicity and all these people screaming "I'll fight it to the supreme court!" really have no business do so.

      Now of course I understand that's not the way it IS but, it is the way it was INTENDED.

      I believe we're starting to get on a slant based on semantics rather and subject. I was arguing in favor of reduced government involvement, the way it SHOULD be, not how it IS.

      --
      The greatest hindrance to success is a well-rationalized excuse
    114. Re:Oops... by builderbob_nz · · Score: 0

      oops, now i will have to change my password. Nows lets see.... I know 1... 2... 3... 4... 5. Done, now you can't get into my computer OR luggage.

      --

      Karma? Hey I just call it as I see it.
    115. Re:Oops... by gertsenl · · Score: 1
      "oh wait... shouldn't people use more than one password?"

      Absolutely! That's why they have

      Three passwords for the Elven kings under the sky,
      Seven for the Dwarf lords in their halls of stone,
      Nine for the mortal Men, doomed to die,
      and one password for the Dark Lord on his dark throne.
      --
      --Leo
    116. Re:Oops... by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      How is it any different than requiring a refund? "This router is broken. It's got a backdoor into it. I want it fixed or I want my money back." That's disproportionate to the harm?

    117. Re:Oops... by Hognoxious · · Score: 0
      I always use my cat's name, "qx5Rt8klV95fgEr5", as a password.
      Wow that's a coincidence, Helen Keller's cat was called that too.
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    118. Re:Oops... by Hognoxious · · Score: 0
      Do you shop around for cars? Do you drive a few, ask your friends/coworkers before you decide what kind of Toyota to get?
      No, but if my car kills me in like a massive explosion or something, I sure as hell won't buy another one the same.
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    119. Re:Oops... by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 1

      How is it any different than requiring a refund?

      Requiring a refund would be a gross miscarriage of justice. IF YOU ARE ACTUALLY HARMED BY VENDOR NEGLIGENCE, you are entitled to compensator damages. If the harm is severe and the negligence was egregious, you might be entitled to punitive damages.

      But IF YOU ARE NOT ACTUALLY HARMED, i.e., you just don't like the product as designed, you are NOT ENTITLED TO DAMAGES.

      How can I make this more clear? More importantly, why should I bother?

      --

      I write in my journal
    120. Re:Oops... by tradero · · Score: 1

      Just how many criminal laws do you think we need? Seriously. Do you think we need another one?

      It's not a new law that is required. It's simply that you need a justice to interpret current law in your favor.

    121. Re:Oops... by Frizzle+Fry · · Score: 1

      That's fair. I took the statement about being under federal authority to mean what happens in practice, but rereading the whole post in context, I see that you meant what authority it is supposed to have, not what authority it actually exerts.

      However, your list of federal powers isn't quite complete. I say that only because your sentence about "Everything else including libraries" not being within federal jurisdiction would seem to indicate that your list is supposed to be complete, but there are legitimate powers of the federal government that you didn't list. Some fall in the the infrastructure caltegory which you already included (e.g., establishing a post office, although that one frankly seems a little outdated now anyway), so that's fine, but others don't (establishing treaties with foreign nations and regulating interstate commerce being two big ones, even if the latter is now used as an excuse for the federal government taking over things that it shouldn't control).

      Also, I'm not sure why you would expect to "catch hell for this" around here, where most people who care at all probably agree with you.

      --
      I'd rather be lucky than good.
    122. Re:Oops... by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 0

      If the government "forces" you to pay back the people you commited fraud against, is it "wildly disproportionate"?

      WOAH. Fraud? What the fuck, dude? You're just making shit up now.

      The difference is that a responsible party at the company knew there was a back door.

      And if something bad happened as a result, that would suck for them.

      I'm also sure they advertised the devices as having security features.

      I'm totally, 100% certain that they did no such thing.

      I'm not asking for compensation from damages caused

      But that's all you're legally entitled to. You think you should be legally entitled to more, and I'm explaining to you that that's not how our system works.

      You're saying that Netgear committed fraud, which is clearly not the case. Do you even know what we're talking about here?

      --

      I write in my journal
    123. Re:Oops... by tomknight · · Score: 1
      Yeah.... jet tell that to the police when they come after you in the body found in freezer hunt.

      "Detectives are hunting the husband of a woman whose dismembered body was found in a freezer in south-west London.

      The body of Tae Hui Dalton, 36, was discovered at her home in Woodside Road, Kingston-upon-Thames, by a member of the public, police said. She lived at the address with her husband Paul Dalton, who is now being sought by police. The 33-year-old man is described as white, of slim to medium build, 6ft tall and has brown wavy short hair. He has blue/grey eyes and a mole on the front left hand side of his neck. It is not thought Mr Dalton poses any danger, but police are advising people not to approach him. Police are awaiting the results of a post-mortem examination which was due to take place on Thursday."

      Tom.

      --
      Oh arse
    124. Re:Oops... by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Netgear released a wireless router without advertising it's security features? Is that what you're saying? If that's the case, then nobody who bought one deserves any compensation at all.

      But let me give another analogy that will, hopefully, clear up my view on the subject.

      If someone sells you a typical consumer level VCR, they warrant it against manufacturing defects and so forth, and typically indemnify themselves against any loss of material that may occur by using that product (like eating your tape).

      Now, if that product routinely eats tapes, they are not responsible (short of, perhaps, the cost of the tape, but not the content). If one of their models does this routinely enough, they'd normally have a voluntary recall of the product to either fix or replace it. If they didn't, I don't see how the government forcing them to do it is "wildly disproportionate".

      Back to netgear - they had their chance to fix the problem with a firmware release and they blew it. Should they be given more chances? I dont' know, can they actually fix the problem? If not, then it'd be no different than the U.S. lemon law on new vehicles in forcing them to buy the units back.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    125. Re:Oops... by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 1

      Now, if that product routinely eats tapes

      Dumb analogy. The router in question wasn't eating traffic.

      If not, then it'd be no different than the U.S. lemon law on new vehicles in forcing them to buy the units back.

      Are you thinking about the Uniform Commercial Code? If so, you need to read it before invoking it. The aforementioned problem is analogous to a loose bit of moulding on a car's interior. The dealer who sold it to you certainly has a moral obligation to try to make you happy with your purchase, but no legal obligation exists, because the defect does not constitute a substantial impairment.

      --

      I write in my journal
    126. Re:Oops... by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      That's right - you are absolutely correct. I know the difference between "how it is" and "how it should be", and I can't believe someone is saying that buying back what is essentially a defective product is somehow "wildly disproportionate."

      Not just disproportionate, but wildly disproportionate. I just can see that viewpoint. And then we ask why these companies think they can release products with known flaws, and the reason is because they don't have any incentive not to.

      Why? Because there are actually people who think that being reimbursed for buying a product with a known flaw is "wildly disproportionate."

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    127. Re:Oops... by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

      only an idiot would use a password like 1..2..3..4..5

      this is a reverse punchline...

  2. Nice fix. by SpyPlane · · Score: 5, Funny

    That would be like "fixing" Windows 95 with Windows ME.

    --
    "We need a fourth law of Robotics: Stop Fingering My Wife"
    1. Re:Nice fix. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that 95 is actually better than ME...

    2. Re:Nice fix. by frozenray · · Score: 0

      > That would be like "fixing" Windows 95 with Windows ME.

      I reckon that's quite appropriate, given that one of the meanings of "to fix" is "to spay or castrate" according to this

      --
      "There are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare." - Blair Houghton
    3. Re:Nice fix. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like the Windows ME dev team has modpoints on slashdot today, eh? Anyway, you're right on target - WinME was the most hideous piece of OS crap I've ever had the disgrace to install, and I've used SCO Unix once. Well, maybe it wasn't that bad, but...

    4. Re:Nice fix. by Sjobeck · · Score: 0

      Awesome! How correct you are. Awesome comment.

  3. noo! by Mz6 · · Score: 1, Informative
    Well, sheesh! Way to tell everyone the username and password combination! Now they have to change it again you insensitive clod!

    Anyways.. For those that can't read German.... Here is the Babelfish translation (kind of).

    Backdoor also in new wl to firmware of Netgear

    Netgear reacted to the messages'r a Backdoor in the wl to ACCESS POINT WG602 Version1 promptly with a firmware update, however the Backdoor is still present -- this time only with new user name and password. With the name one was a little creative and extended the urspr?liche character string "super" too "superman". With the password Netgear has obviously Forenbeitr? for the first message of the Sicherheitsl?e seriously taken and the number on 21241036 ge?ert. To whom however this telephone number is geh?n, Netgear Germany could not say to us -- there one knew nothing from the new problem and wanted only to make itself once kundig.

    An again updated firmware design does not give it yet. Anyway the question arises whether users are still determined after the second Patzer to bring new software in. In opinion of lawyers this problem k?te quite reason enough its, the Ger? to the H?ler zur?zubringen and the purchase price zur?zufordern. The Ver'ker can try to improve the lack however the chances stand daf'im for moment obviously quite badly.

    --
    Hmmm.
    1. Re:noo! by SpyPlane · · Score: 0
      "The Ver'ker can try to improve the lack however the chances stand daf'im for moment obviously quite badly."

      That's what I'm saying... sheesh.

      --
      "We need a fourth law of Robotics: Stop Fingering My Wife"
    2. Re:noo! by frs_rbl · · Score: 1, Funny
      the Ger? to the H?ler zur?zubringen and the purchase price zur?zufordern

      But if they H?ler zur?zubringen , and the purchase price zur?zufordern... we are DOOMED!

      --
      This is not my opinion. Actually, it's not even an opinion. And I'm nowhere to be seen near it
  4. A joke surely? by djsmiley · · Score: 1

    Someone somewhere has GOT to be pulling legs...

    That is the most stupid thing i think i have ever heard!.

    FP BTW.

    --
    - http://www.milkme.co.uk
    1. Re:A joke surely? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YFI BTW.

    2. Re:A joke surely? by CaptainZapp · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I wish it was true.

      Unfortunately Heise (publisher of c't and iX) is the probably most clueful German publishing house when it comes to technology.

      Those Netgear bozos really seem to be dumber then my cigar cutter.

      The other explanation is that the equipment has such a fundamental design flaw that it can't be fixed at all. But then they act damn unresponsible.

      Then again: Thanks to such blunders I know what equipment not to buy.

      --
      ich bin der musikant

      mit taschenrechner in der hand

      kraftwerk

    3. Re:A joke surely? by N3Z · · Score: 2, Funny

      Those Netgear bozos really seem to be dumber then my cigar cutter.

      And not nearly as sharp!

      --
      .signature not found
    4. Re:A joke surely? by pongo000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then again: Thanks to such blunders I know what equipment not to buy.

      The fundamental problem here is that we're running out of vendors! Linksys and Belkin are on the shitlist; now NetGear. Who, exactly, does that leave for consumer-grade networking equipment? I don't know about where you live, but where I live, these are about the only three vendors that show up on the computer store shelves (well, there are some cheapo brands, but they suffer even worse quality control problems).

    5. Re:A joke surely? by a7244270 · · Score: 2, Informative
      The fundamental problem here is that we're running out of vendors! Linksys and Belkin are on the shitlist; now NetGear. Who, exactly, does that leave for consumer-grade networking equipment?

      Apple?

    6. Re:A joke surely? by torqer · · Score: 2, Informative

      I use D-link for all my home networking needs

    7. Re:A joke surely? by GiMP · · Score: 2, Informative

      I had a compatability and reliability problem with a Dlink 802.11g router I bought when used with other manufacturer's WiFi equipment - seems most of their wireless gear suffers from this, from what I've read.

    8. Re:A joke surely? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      SMC?

    9. Re:A joke surely? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've used a DLink DI-604 for a couple of years and haven't had any problems. YMMV.

    10. Re:A joke surely? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only that in this case the software wasn't written at Netgear. It was contracted out to some other company. I realize that it is easy to blame Netgear for this fault but let's face it: the software was contracted out and when it was delivered, you would expect to receive it as a product which you could integrate into your hardware router, and not have to check every line of code because you didn't trust the firmware vendor to write proper code.

    11. Re:A joke surely? by Jacer · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's because of their 4x stuff. If you disable their proprietary packet sizes and compression stuffs, you get some nice reliabiity.

      --
      --fetch daddy's blue fright wig, i must be handsome when i release my rage
    12. Re:A joke surely? by clymere · · Score: 1

      they are exiting the markt, but MS actually made pretty decent network hardware. Enen works under Linux :)

      --
      once you go slack, you never go back
    13. Re:A joke surely? by gstoddart · · Score: 1
      Then again: Thanks to such blunders I know what equipment not to buy.


      Ah, but it doesn't tell us who we can buy.

      Except for ruling out one vendor, I'm no closer to having a clue as to who does have a wireless router I'm comfortable can be secured.

      Looks like I'll be stringing some cable in my new house rather than trying for wireless.
      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    14. Re:A joke surely? by Shimmer · · Score: 1

      I use Proxim.

      --
      The most rabid believers in American Exceptionalism are the exact same people whose policies are destroying it.
    15. Re:A joke surely? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      1. Only that in this case the software wasn't written at Netgear. It was contracted out to some other company. I realize that it is easy to blame Netgear for this fault but let's face it: the software was contracted out and when it was delivered, you would expect to receive it as a product which you could integrate into your hardware router, and not have to check every line of code because you didn't trust the firmware vendor to write proper code.

      Not an excuse. The customer of the contractor has to have proper oversight. If they don't, or it's clear that the contractor is not working in the best interests of the customer, it's as much of the customer's fault as the contractor's.

      It all has to do with the chain of responsibility. If someone at a store is rude to you or just not helpful, it's not that person's fault as much as the manager who hired them...and that goes for that manager's manager...on up the chain.

      Another example: If Nike contracts a company to make shoes and that company abuses thier employees, Nike is responsible for hiring that company and for having oversight on the job they do.

      That said, the proper response from Netgear is to fire the contract company.

    16. Re:A joke surely? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Proxim's web page is not happy with Konqueror

    17. Re:A joke surely? by markan18 · · Score: 1

      There is only one vendor which i trust. At least, you can see their patches and modify them if you see fit.

    18. Re:A joke surely? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (pats FREESCO box)
      WHAT fundamental problem?? :P

    19. Re:A joke surely? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use a 2Wire HomePortal. Built-in firewall, ADSL modem, wireless router, plus Ethernet and USB ports.

    20. Re:A joke surely? by ticktockticktock · · Score: 1

      Are you kidding? Even SMC does stupid things with their routers (although I am not sure if it applies to their wireless ones).

    21. Re:A joke surely? by DeadPrez · · Score: 1

      Well, at least Linksys has posted an actual fix, though only in alpha form. There are also 3rd party flash updates as well.

    22. Re:A joke surely? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't speak for D-Link in general, but I'll vouch for the DI-604...with the latest firmware. One older version of the firmware kept reseting the router whenever I tried to go to Gentoo's webpage. After the firmware upgrade it worked fine.

      It's a simple device, but it has nive features, doesn't cost much, and basically...works. With no back doors.

      I think...

  5. I wonder... by barcodez · · Score: 4, Funny

    I thought the last article said changing passwords was a good idea! Make your minds up.

    I jest of course.

    --

    ----
    1. Re:I wonder... by FearTheFrail · · Score: 5, Funny

      But it takes numbers + characters to make -strong- passwords. So the next logical step:

      Login: Theyllneverguess
      Password: cuzimso1337

      --
      ___ In the words of Gen. Douglas McArthur: "I'll be right back."
    2. Re:I wonder... by pe1rxq · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The user changing a password and thereby closing the backdoor is a good idea.
      The company changing a backdoor password into another but keeping the backdoor is a bad idea.

      Jeroen

      --
      Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
    3. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
      Wow, I'm so glad you cleared that up for us...

      +1 INFORMATIVE!!

    4. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who modded this insightful? IS NOT UNDERSTANDING WHAT HUMOR MEANS INSIGHTFUL THESE DAYS?

      Have some damn standards, people!

      lowerlowerlowerlowerlowerlowerlowerlower

    5. Re:I wonder... by skiman1979 · · Score: 1

      interesting... my password always shows as Password: ********

      --
      Having a smoking section in a public restaurant is like having a peeing section in a public swimming pool.
    6. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi. You really need to download this.

    7. Re:I wonder... by burns210 · · Score: 1
      The user changing a password and thereby closing the backdoor is a good idea.

      Should read: The user changing a DEFAULT password and thereby CHANGING the DEFAULT ACCOUNT is a good idea.

      The company changing a backdoor password into another but keeping the backdoor is a bad idea.

      Don't forget, the backdoor isn't just a defualt username and password, rather, it is hardcoded in, you CAN'T change it.

  6. HAHA by hypermike · · Score: 0

    Netgear is Kryptonite Baby!

    --
  7. Superman!! by Claire-plus-plus · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well at least sys-admins and network engineers can finally use the login name they think they deserve.

    --
    99 bottles of beer in 175 characte
    1. Re:Superman!! by petabyte · · Score: 1

      Well at least sys-admins and network engineers can finally use the login name they think they deserve.

      Well, actually I think they'll all continue using "god" to login.

    2. Re:Superman!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      god is dead, the need superman (overman) to save the world.

    3. Re:Superman!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My former place of employment used marvel superhero-related things for usernames and passwords.

      They won't change to actual secure passwords. Making leet haxxor alterations is probably not that secure.

      sad.

      then again, i don't use secure passwords either, because I want to actually remember them instead of having to keep 97237939735890103hkhkket7u3 in my head all the time.

    4. Re:Superman!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, god may be dead alright, but superman isn't look that spiffy also, being in a weelchair and all, these days...

    5. Re:Superman!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn you! Don't give away my password!

    6. Re:Superman!! by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Personally I generally pick some obscure technical term (not computer related) that won't be in any standard dictionary, and then make a few 133t mods to it. If it's short, I combine two of them. This makes an easily memorable password/phrase. Occasionally I'll invent a term...that tends to make a good password, and since it has meaning it relatively easy to remember.

      Another possibility is to take a relatively long dictionary word and put it through some simple mod (add or subtract n from each letter mod 26), and then do the 133t spelling mods. Easy to generate algorithmically, but hard to guess. And relatively easy to remember. (If necessary you could write down the plain-text password, but not the code for the mods.)

      There was a time when I used Hen3ry, but the internet was young then, and crackers much less prevalent. (Also, I was then an admirer of Tom Lehrer. Now I find him more depressing than humorous.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  8. Translation...no mod by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    HERE is the google translation, for those of us who don't speak German

  9. Mickey Mouse by msgmonkey · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If this their idea of pluging a security hole then I don't think I will be purchasing any kind of routing equipment from this mickey mouse outfit in the future.

    1. Re:Mickey Mouse by CableModemSniper · · Score: 1

      Donald Duck!

      --
      Why not fork?
    2. Re:Mickey Mouse by klui · · Score: 1

      It's obvious those who made this change has no clue how to fix it properly. Original coders were probably laid off.

    3. Re:Mickey Mouse by antime · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The original coders are probably emplyed by the same Korean company that made the hardware. I guess Netgear only get a limited "customisation kit" so they can put in their own name and change the backdoor password - but not completely disable it.

    4. Re:Mickey Mouse by robochan · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they have the same marketing department as Belkin?

      --
      ...Rob
      The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
  10. Not funny at all by Ckwop · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't think there's anything amusing about this at all. I think the owners of these units should file a class action lawsuit, though i'm not even sure that's possible due to the EULA. If the EULA does get in the way then
    I think it's time the government steped in to protect the consumer and started making companies liable for acts as stupid as this. This just isn't the way a responsible company behaves.

    Simon.

    1. Re:Not funny at all by Dutchmaan · · Score: 5, Funny

      This just isn't the way a responsible company behaves.

      responsible company

      Trying to put these two words together is like trying to touch two magnet ends with the same polarity.

    2. Re:Not funny at all by CleverNickedName · · Score: 0

      If the EULA does get in the way then I think it's time the government stepped in to protect the consumer and started making companies liable for acts as stupid as this.

      I dislike these EULAs as much as anyone, but if the EULA states that the product might not be too safe, then the customer has agreed to fork out X amount of cash for a non-too safe product.
      Worse still, it the EULA is hidden at the time of purchase, that the customer has agreed to fork out money for an unknown product.

      It's never the government's job to take responsibility for the customer's actions.

      --


      Unfortunately, I am not Wil Wheaton
    3. Re:Not funny at all by Albanach · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      Instead of spending time consulting lawyers, why don't the lusers instead spend time reading the accompanying manual which tells them to select their own password.

      Why do people want to blame, sue and hold responsible a company for the actions of users who have chosen either not to read or not to follow the doccumentation.

      I'm not trolling here, I agree that these things should be shipped so they won't fnction until a password is chosen by the user. Nonetheless, the users were told to set a password and ignored that advice, now the company that provided the hardware is supposed to be responsible for their ignorance?

    4. Re:Not funny at all by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 1

      You said that the government should help us out on this one. I'm not sure that's such a good idea. I don't mean to be a conspiracy nut, but isn't the government an institution that wants to restrict encryption and what not? This sounds like something they might have been compelled to do by THE MAN.

      --
      Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
    5. Re:Not funny at all by pe1rxq · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is about a hardcoded backdoor that can't be closed by the user.

      Jeroen

      --
      Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
    6. Re:Not funny at all by the_mad_poster · · Score: 1

      Of course, this neglects the fact that the users have to actively negate the ignorance of the company in the first place. You can't screw something up, tell someone else how to fix it, and then act like it's thier fault that it's still screwed up when they don't. You shouldn't have screwed it up in the first place. Being the first point of failure, you also become the first responsible party.

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    7. Re:Not funny at all by pe1rxq · · Score: 1

      I don't know how it is in your country but here (The Netherlands) you have a right to expect certain things from a product when you buy it.

      E.g. If the seller sold you a tv set you may expect it to behave as a tv set. Even if the seller only gives 1 year of waranty you can expect a tv set to last longer than that and still have rights to e.g refund (although partial) or repair if it brakes after 2 years.

      If the seller gave the impression that he was selling a Wifi wap with a secure management interface the buyer has a right to asume a certain level of security.

      Jeroen

      --
      Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
    8. Re:Not funny at all by kfg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      . . .though i'm not even sure that's possible due to the EULA.

      EULAs cannot prevent lawsuits. The EULA becomes part of the evidence of the suit and the suit itself determines to what degree, if any, its terms effect a possible ruling.

      In fact, this is precisely how the legality of a EULA is tested. A EULA is a just a contract. Contracts don't prevent lawsuits, they become the object of them.

      KFG

    9. Re:Not funny at all by 91degrees · · Score: 3, Informative

      In fact, this is precisely how the legality of a EULA is tested. A EULA is a just a contract. Contracts don't prevent lawsuits, they become the object of them.

      Strictly speaking, it's a licence. It's different. It gives you permission to do certain things with it assuming certain limitiations. e.g. You may use this product for reasons X and Y but not Z. As a licence, it cannot require the licencee to give up anything in return.

    10. Re:Not funny at all by johnnyb · · Score: 1, Troll

      This is BS. There are many responsible companies. Unfortunately they usually don't become big because being responsible usually means that they have to have higher prices. And, of course, most computer purchasers care more about price than responsible companies.

    11. Re:Not funny at all by kfg · · Score: 1

      A license is a contract. If you have to click "I accept" it is overtly recognized as such by the licensor.

      As a licence, it cannot require the licencee to give up anything in return.

      Nonsense. You are often called upon to give up some consideration for the limited rights the license grants you. Commonly this is in the form of finacial consideration. Your money is yours by right. You must transfer that right to the licensor. Under the GPL consideration is given by an exchange of rights. I'll give you some of mine if you give me some of yours (and the idea that the GPL is somehow different than what propriatary software rights holders do is nonsense. The holders of propriatary rights make exactly such contractual agreements to exchange rights as a matter of course. The GPL simply offers this form of consideration on a broader basis than is usual).

      If there is consideration, there is a contract. Even a simple retail exchange is contractual. You agree to give them money, they agree to give you property rights.

      There are, however, certain legal limitations on what you can be required to give up, and of such limitations law suits are made.

      Contract definition

      KFG

    12. Re:Not funny at all by GreyPoopon · · Score: 1
      Instead of spending time consulting lawyers, why don't the lusers instead spend time reading the accompanying manual which tells them to select their own password.

      Maybe instead, you need to spend some time reading the article, the accompanying comments and the previous Slashdot posting. This is not a user-configurable password. It's a backdoor login and password that users are not notified of. I might as well not bother to change the default login and password if anybody can instead use the backdoor set.

      Why do people want to blame, sue and hold responsible a company for the actions of users who have chosen either not to read or not to follow the doccumentation.

      Because there is no action users could take to fix this problem while still using the device, and the documentation says NOTHING about it. There is no reason for this kind of backdoor other than for hacking by Netgear employees. In such a consumer-grade device, emergency access for a lost password should be as easy as a hardware button to reset to factory defaults. For commercial-grade devices, there are more complicated methods of hardware-enabling backdoors that are otherwise unavailable.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    13. Re:Not funny at all by i_m_sane · · Score: 1

      This has nothing to do with the password that the user selects.

      The fact is if you go to _ANY_ netgear router of this make and model you can type that password in and gain access.

      A backdoor is something that a programer adds to make it easier to administer the product at a later date. and it is a Major risk.

      --
      Adam Sane sanity is a dirty job, but somebody has to do it.
    14. Re:Not funny at all by necro2607 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you can push the ends together by force but the moment you let go they snap apart immediately! That analogy is all too appropriate...

    15. Re:Not funny at all by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is BS. There are many responsible companies. Unfortunately they usually don't become big because being responsible usually means that they have to have higher prices.

      No, there aren't many responsible companies at all, and your post illustrates why. They have higher prices, less effective marketing (because they don't lie like their irresponsible competition), don't get ahead because they don't do unethical backroom deals, etc., so in the end they just go belly-up, and all the irresponsible companies get bigger.

    16. Re:Not funny at all by iCEBaLM · · Score: 1

      Last I heard you couldn't put an EULA on a peice of hardware. A firewall with a backdoor is not meeting the requirements of FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Of course IANAL.

    17. Re:Not funny at all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Instead of spending time consulting lawyers, why don't the lusers instead spend time reading the accompanying manual which tells them to select their own password.

      Instead of posting on /. without reading the article, why don't you spend some time trying to understand the issue here.

      Why do people want to blame, sue and hold responsible a company for the actions of users who have chosen either not to read or not to follow the doccumentation.

      Because THERE IS NO WAY TO DISABLE THIS BACKDOOR.

      I'm not trolling here

      Then you're a moron.

    18. Re:Not funny at all by Albanach · · Score: 1

      Yes, you make a good point - I was mistaken, thinking it was Linksys not Netgear. A hard coded backdoor is a much bigger problem than the Linksys Router faces.

    19. Re:Not funny at all by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      A license is a contract. If you have to click "I accept" it is overtly recognized as such by the licensor.

      No it isn't. Groklaw dealt with this a while ago, and I'm going mostly from memory here. A contract is specifically dealt with under contract law. A licence is not. Clicking "I accept" means that you have accepted the permission they grant to you. If you breach the licence, then there is nothing they can do to you unless you also breach other laws in doing so.

      Nonsense. You are often called upon to give up some consideration for the limited rights the license grants you.

      No you aren't.

      Commonly this is in the form of finacial consideration. Your money is yours by right. You must transfer that right to the licensor.

      This would be a contract. You can, of course, purchase a licence, but that involves both a licence and a contract.

      Under the GPL consideration is given by an exchange of rights. I'll give you some of mine if you give me some of yours.

      The GPL does not require that you surrender any rights. It grants you the right to redistribute it. It is true that you can't redistribute it without source, but you never had that right in the first place.

      If there is consideration, there is a contract. Even a simple retail exchange is contractual. You agree to give them money, they agree to give you property rights.

      This is correct. Purchases are contracts. In fact, you can legally sue someone for "breach of contract" if they sell you faulty goods (At least in England).

    20. Re:Not funny at all by MythoBeast · · Score: 1

      While it can't require the lecencee to give up anything in return, it does place liability on the licencee. Although it may state that no warranty or safeguard is implied, it is impossible to sign away one's rights in the United States.

      This is essentially an unsafe product. Just as a person can sue if a product causes personal damage due to an unsafe design, it is entirely possible for a company to sue if the manufacturer included hidden features which are obviously dangerous to the company's welfare.

      --
      Wake up - the future is arriving faster than you think.
    21. Re:Not funny at all by kfg · · Score: 1

      No it isn't. Groklaw dealt with this a while ago, and I'm going mostly from memory here. A contract is specifically dealt with under contract law. A licence is not. Clicking "I accept" means that you have accepted the permission they grant to you. If you breach the licence, then there is nothing they can do to you unless you also breach other laws in doing so.

      I demure. I need more coffee or something.

      Kindly stick your foot up my ass and substitue "license" where I wrote "contract" in my OP.

      KFG

    22. Re:Not funny at all by johnnyb · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "so in the end they just go belly-up"

      Not really. They are usually just smaller and local. That's the real reason behind the "buy local" idea. It's not necessarily that paying money to someone to your home town is better than paying someone in Oregon or wherever, it's that if they live in your town, then your own community holds them to higher standards.

    23. Re:Not funny at all by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I don't think this is all that great an idea, either. I've seen lots of small, local businesses that totally suck. They seem to survive because they're local; people would rather go there and pay their ridiculous prices just because it's close and convenient.

      My favorite places to shop are small online merchants. I've run across several online shops that are small and independently-owned, yet have excellent service and prices. They can also have an excellent selection since they tend to specialize in something small. Being online, they don't have to pay the ridiculous rental costs for commercial storefront space, so their costs are low, allowing them to keep their prices low. And also since they're online, you're not stuck with whoever happens to be in your local area. One good example I've found is 2filter.com, a merchant that sells only photographic filters.

    24. Re:Not funny at all by tepples · · Score: 1

      My favorite places to shop are small online merchants.

      Like this one, which sells inkjet supplies out of Fort Wayne, Indiana?

    25. Re:Not funny at all by johnnyb · · Score: 1

      "pay their ridiculous prices just because it's close and convenient."

      What do you mean by "rediculous prices"? Those are usually just the prices that you have to charge when you are not screwing someone over. It seems that your greed may be driving corporate greed.

      "My favorite places to shop are small online merchants."

      Many of these are great. However, because of the anonymity of the web, it is not possible to verify that these people are not themselves screwing someone else over to make their money.

    26. Re:Not funny at all by fermion · · Score: 1

      IANAL, but I think this statement is false. If the license says that you cannot file suit, the first thing you must do file suit is sue for the right to file suit. If it says you can only arbitrate in Pokono, then you may be stuck going to Pokono. We users give up virtually all rights in exchange for using software, and must pay additional money to reclaim some of those right. That is what makes free software so nice. You only have to pay to reclaim rights, not to relinquish them.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    27. Re:Not funny at all by kfg · · Score: 1

      If the license says that you cannot file suit, the first thing you must do file suit is sue for the right to file suit.

      On oxymoron, no?

      You can file a suit anywhere against anyone and for damned near any reason.

      That brings the matter before a judge and only the judge can decide what is is not proper in his court. If a software company says the the terms of license specify that you must file Pokono he will either accept that argument or not. If he excepts it you have to go to Pokono, if he does not than the suit proceeds no matter what it says in the EULA.

      Just because it says something in a EULA doesn't mean it's actually binding in a court of law, or even out of one for that matter.

      A judge with a case before him is the only arbiter of what is and is not binding.

      It's not like the court clerk is going to look at you and say, "I'm sorry sir, but I can't except this filing because of the EULA."

      KFG

    28. Re:Not funny at all by mandalayx · · Score: 1

      No, there aren't many responsible companies at all, and your post illustrates why. They have higher prices, less effective marketing (because they don't lie like their irresponsible competition), don't get ahead because they don't do unethical backroom deals, etc., so in the end they just go belly-up, and all the irresponsible companies get bigger.

      Not really. Some people actually go out of their way to buy from companies that they like. For example, I try to buy Newman's Own products even if they cost a little more since all profits go to charity. You can find analgous cases in software--I'd rather pay a little more for a non-Microsoft product, even if the marketing is a little less effective and the backroom deals aren't there.

      Do all consumers think like this? probably not. But here's my data point.

    29. Re:Not funny at all by Eivind · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Not really.

      A license gives you the rigth to do something that would be, in the absence said license, illegal.

      For example, you can get a concealed weapons license, which will make it legal for you to do something that would otherwise be illegae -- carry a concealed weapon in public.

      Similarily, the GPL is a license -- it gives you the rigth to do certain things that would be illegal without a license, such as redistributing the software in original or altered form.

      Most EULAs are not licenses. They do not let you do anything that would be illegal without one. Instead they typically attempt to do the reverse; they attempt to prevent you from stuff that are perfectly legal by default, such as for example reselling your property, publishing a test of a product you've purchased, or even using the product for producing a report critical of the producer.

      That makes it different. If I want to give you permission for something that would otherwise be illegal, say I want to give you permission to enter my house, I can just do so. One-sided. There's no requirement for you to agree. If I demand something in return, like the GPL does, and say: "you may enter my house at will, provided you put a dollar in this box, and wear orange underpants." you're still not required to agree, though if you don't agree, then entering is unlawful.

      EULAs are different. They typically don't offer you anything. And no, the "rigth to use software" doesn't fall in this category, because it's the *default* that you're allowed to use software that you legally bougth. (what a concept !)

      The producers typically *claim* that they are not selling you one copy of the software, but rather they're selling you a license to the software. However this claim is pretty dubious. Anyone can go into a shop and say: "I would like to purchase a copy of Microsoft Office". They'll take your money, and hand over a copy of Microsoft Office. A reasonable person would then assume that he had, indeed, bougth one copy of Microsoft Office. It's not very likely that some text inside the box, or even worse, displayed as part of some installation-routine uniliterally can change this.

  11. not obsecure anymore by millahtime · · Score: 1

    They may have changed the password but for someone who wants to hack it they will have 2 choices.

    Also, because of /. it will be easy to find in google now

    This is also not an update that your average user will install

    Seems it's like someone getting into your computer cause you left a sticky note with the password there. So you change the password, put the new one on a sticky on the monitor. What's the point.

  12. another one bites the dust by klocwerk · · Score: 0, Redundant

    /me takes another vendor off my personal acceptable list

    --

    "You worthless post!"
    -Shakespeare, 2 Gentlemen of Verona, 1. 1. 147
    1. Re:another one bites the dust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt they give a shit.

  13. Now you did it! by saddino · · Score: 4, Funny

    They replaced the old user name 'super' with 'superman', and changed the old password to '21241036'. "

    And thanks to Slashdot, thus begins an endless stream of firmware updates; every time Netgear "fixes" their problem, I'm sure an article here will put the cycle in motion again. Let's see, who wants to guess what they change the password to next?

    "superduperman", anyone?

    1. Re:Now you did it! by lockefire · · Score: 0

      Nein! Ubersoldier!
      *pulls of RTCW*

    2. Re:Now you did it! by corngrower · · Score: 1
      who wants to guess what they change the password to next? ..."superduperman", anyone?

      Na -- 'Flash_Gordon'

    3. Re:Now you did it! by Lifewolf · · Score: 1
      "superduperman", anyone?

      Oh, thanks. Now I have that annoying Toy Box song stuck in my head.

      --
      "Be Happy or Die." -- AoN
    4. Re:Now you did it! by Claire-plus-plus · · Score: 1

      "god" maybe? Ubermensch?

      --
      99 bottles of beer in 175 characte
    5. Re:Now you did it! by wowbagger · · Score: 1

      Naw.

      Stupidman:Password

      Then they will wise up and fix it by removing the usernamd and password altogether.

    6. Re:Now you did it! by hardaker · · Score: 1
      Then they will wise up and fix it by removing the usernamd and password altogether.

      Unfortunately, I suspect you're right. Just not in the way you thought...

      • username: ""
      • password: ""

      --
      The next site to slashdot will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and start slashdotting it early!
    7. Re:Now you did it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope it'll be
      Username: Batman
      Password: G07h4mC17y

      or
      Username: Spider-man
      Password: W3bh34d
      seeing that the movie will be released soon.

    8. Re:Now you did it! by Sir+dies+alot · · Score: 1

      My bet is on SupermanReturns, or SupermanStrikesBack, with a password of a different employee's phone number.

      --
      The stupidity of your average American is just about the same as the average European, we simply show it off better.
    9. Re:Now you did it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "superduperman", anyone?

      I vote for "Duck_Dodgers" with a password of "twentyfourthandahalfcentury"...

    10. Re:Now you did it! by Mentally_Overclocked · · Score: 1

      CowboyNeal?

      --

      Mathematician, n.:
      Someone who believes imaginary things appear right before your i's.
    11. Re:Now you did it! by wowbagger · · Score: 1

      No, that is EXACTLY the way I thought.

      Sad to say.

      Perhaps what we need are drugs that do the opposite of the meds they give paranoids - because it sounds to me like the Netgear guys aren't paranoid enough!

  14. Bianry Edit by HogGeek · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I'm wondering if one could use something like bvi to change the username and password to something private.

    I've done it with other types of binary files, but never tried with firmware.

    Anyone try this?

    1. Re:Bianry Edit by catmaker · · Score: 4, Informative


      I'd imagine it wouldn't work. They've probably checksummed the file, and if you change any of the content you'd have to rechecksum it, if you even knew what kind of checksum (if any) they'd used.

      Nice idea though.

      --
      status is failure. status is failure
    2. Re:Bianry Edit by logic7 · · Score: 1

      my guess is that update will be worthless then, because the checksum of the binary will be incorrect after editing the file.

    3. Re:Bianry Edit by MrBlue+VT · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I have an earlier Netgear product (RT314). It's actually a rebranded Zytel product, so this trick may not work on other models.

      However, it was possible to edit the firmware in a binary editor. There was a checksum in the firmware, but you could fix it. You needed to connect a serial cable to the management port. When you made a change and uploaded the new firmware to the router and rebooted, the router would helpfully tell you what the old checksum was and what it expected the new checksum to be. You could then just search for the old checksum string and replace it with the new one the router calculated for you.

      Pretty easy to do. And allowed you to run some of the newer Zytel firmware on the Netgear boxes.

    4. Re:Bianry Edit by br0ck · · Score: 1

      I have that same router, so your post prompted me to look around for Zytel firmware updates, but I couldn't seem to find any. Before investing any more effort, I was wondering if you could tell me what improvements you have found? Speed? Security? Was this worth the effort, or was it just a fun research project?

      Thanks..

    5. Re:Bianry Edit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check out http://www.netgear.org/. It's got a bunch of info on the RT311/RT314. One of the main additions I like was the SNMP. You can then run a network traffic grapher to see the bandwith usage.

      Check out the forums for info on how to hack the Zytel firmware. Or let me know and I can email it to you if you can't find it. I believe 3.50 (M.00) was the latest version that worked on Netgear hardware.

    6. Re:Bianry Edit by MrBlue+VT · · Score: 1

      Oops, didn't mean to post that last comment anonymously. Meant to check the No Karma Bonus box instead.

  15. I would say this qualifies more as ... by burgburgburg · · Score: 4, Insightful
    "security through stupidity".

    But that's just me.

    1. Re:I would say this qualifies more as ... by DrEldarion · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't that be "insecurity"?

    2. Re:I would say this qualifies more as ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. It's just like flammable and inflammable-insecurity is the way to go!

    3. Re:I would say this qualifies more as ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would say that qualifies more as "Troll".

      But that's just me.

    4. Re:I would say this qualifies more as ... by Inuchance · · Score: 1

      Or they could be practicing the ancient zen art of security through insecurity.

  16. Reputation damage by SamiousHaze · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I am so irritated I don't know what to say. Seriously, How can netgear expect people to trust them again, is there any way to repair their reputation?

    1. Re:Reputation damage by mrm677 · · Score: 1

      How can netgear expect people to trust them again, is there any way to repair their reputation?


      I would guess that greater than 99.999% of NetGear's customer base doesn't read Slashdot. Hence their reputation will stay intact as long as retail stores keep carrying their products.

    2. Re:Reputation damage by Marcus+Erroneous · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I concur, their reputation is badly damaged now. Fortunately, I don't have this WAP in my house, nor am I now likely to use their gear in the future. I can't trust them and that lack of trust will be multiplied as I tell the people that come to me for advice not to use NetGear equipment.
      From other postings, it appears that until this, technically they appear to produce good equipment. However, undocumented "features" ;) like this are inexcusable, all the more so when the end user cannot fix it themselves, even if they want to! I'll agree that most people don't read slashdot and so might not know (nor care in many cases), but for those of us that do, it would be nice if we could fix it. If the firmware made it something that the end user could correct, and end users then did not, that would be one thing. But, to use the car scenario again, to unweld the hood, make a change and then weld it shut again is a poor decision.
      Those of us that regularly read Slashdot are probably the alpha geeks of our groups. The person that many people come to for informal IT support at home and at work. I am frequently asked my opinion about gear and for recommendations on what gear to buy. These people then tell their friends what they use, why they use it and how satisfied they are. This "viral" type of advertising is the kind that you can't buy when it's good and can't kill when it's not. I will not recommend products by a company that, when caught with it's hand in the cookie jar, merely switches hands. It was bad enough to get caught doing this but to change the password rather than remove the exploit reveals a mindset that I will keep in mind during future work in this field.
      Can they recover from this? I would imagine that there are ways to do so aside from the usual corporate tactic of relying on consumer apathy and time. I'll be curious to see if they bother and what they do if they do bother to try.

      --
      You must be the change you wish to see in the world - Ghandi
    3. Re:Reputation damage by Alsee · · Score: 1

      is there any way to repair their reputation?

      There's a new firmware patch to replace their "super" reputation with "superduper".

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  17. At least ... by supergiovane · · Score: 1, Funny

    ... the password is not 12345.

    --
    Signatures are for stupids.
    1. Re:At least ... by REBloomfield · · Score: 1

      The launch codes for American ICBM's used to be 00000000 according to something I read this morning, but I forget where and what in....

    2. Re:At least ... by bje2 · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's amazing. I've got the same combination on my luggage.

      --

      "Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true." - Homer Simpson
    3. Re:At least ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, thanks for sharing then.

    4. Re:At least ... by chris_mahan · · Score: 1

      Yeah, except that you could not activate it via wireless. Or could you...

      --

      "Piter, too, is dead."

    5. Re:At least ... by no+longer+myself · · Score: 1

      Perhaps this will jog your memory? ;-)

    6. Re:At least ... by nikster · · Score: 1

      true story: a couple once ran off with my wife's suitcase from the baggage claim. I caught them outside on their way to the taxi and asked them if they were sure that was their luggage (black samsonite). They were absolutely, adamantly sure. No Way that was mine. they had checked because there are so many suitcases like that. after a lot of convincing, i got them to open it up anyway.

      it turns out they had checked the combination to see if it was theirs: 000.

      (we have since changed the combination and added stickers)

    7. Re:At least ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah....I understand why the mods aren't getting this joke today. Obviously today's moderators are all in high school and don't recall the movie Spaceballs from which this quote came from.

      Mods -- if you don't get a joke, don't automatically moderate something as troll, overrated, or some other rating. Somebody else just might get it...

    8. Re:At least ... by slyborg · · Score: 1

      "So, the combination is: one, two, three, four, five. That's the stupidest combination I ever heard in my life! That's the kind of thing an idiot would have on his luggage!" - Dark Helmet in Spaceballs!

  18. hehe by yaroze32 · · Score: 1

    makes you fell real "Safe" now does it

  19. I can just hear the techs now by ptelligence · · Score: 2, Funny

    This looks like a job for.......SUPERMAN!

    1. Re:I can just hear the techs now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like a job done by... BICYCLE REPAIR MAN!
      So Superman is defiantely in order...

    2. Re:I can just hear the techs now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Boooo! Very poor attempt.

  20. Wow, What A brillient Job by masternerd · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Changing the user information, is a fix ??? Whats up with you guy ? Joke! What do I comment on this stupid move.

  21. Very sad by Sandman1971 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Now this is very sad. How can any semi-reputable company call changing the admin username and password for a major security hole a fix? Especially since they should have realized this new username/password would hit the net faster than Homer at an all you can eat buffet.

    Since these things have built in firewalls, wouldnt the fix just include a user-invisible firewall rule preventing access to the router on whatever the admin port is (80, 8080, etc..)? Seems like a fairly simple fix to me.

    Thanks Netgear! You've just assured that I'll never buy one of your products!

    --
    It's better to burn out than to fade away
    1. Re:Very sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe most routers have well-known/published administrator logins.

      Not really a problem for ethernet-based ones, as you prevent admin access from external ip's using filters, as you're suggesting.
      I'm thinking the good folks at netgear already have a solution like this in place, and that the entire firmware 'patch' was done just to please the ignorant masses..

      I'm no WIFI guru, but WPA or something should be plenty for preventing unauthorized 'local' connections..?

    2. Re:Very sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'm no WIFI guru, but WPA or something should be plenty for preventing unauthorized 'local' connections..?

      on WIFI, that is.
  22. Link on securityfocus by Gyorg_Lavode · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I couldn't find the exact link at first glance, but this one is a reply to it: http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/365292/2004 -06-05/2004-06-11/0

    --
    I do security
    1. Re:Link on securityfocus by Chucky+B.+Bear · · Score: 1

      Yes that would be that made the original securityfocus post(Jaco Swart). I did speak to a Netgear support engineer yesterday and he had absolutely no idea what I was going on about. He did of course promise to call back but I'm still waiting.

  23. full-disclosure hackers knew for a while by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The blackhats that subscribe to

    http://lists.netsys.com/mailman/listinfo/full-di sc losure

    knew about this on irc for a while.

    EU via interpol desires, and us's NSA/NRO both desire various entrypoints.

    cisco's fiascos may be a trend. This netgear is only the tip of the iceberg I bet.

    1. Re:full-disclosure hackers knew for a while by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      EU via interpol desires, and us's NSA/NRO both desire various entrypoints.

      If any EU agency want acces it would have infiltrated the standard proces behind the protocols used in this device and forced either a crypto algorithm with problems or a wrong implementation of the crypto. Both heaponed with GSM years ago. The information system of interpol is impressive. From open sources it would seem it is a big IBM database accesible through VPN from most police station in the western world (possibly by a browser). But interpol doesn`t go around buggin phones, member police forces do that. Also for now interpol is the exciting group to watch, but it will by no means be the only one. The EU has its own european counterpart, Europol (and eurojust) and has worked (even more?) since the Madrid train bombings to have inteligence agencies working together.

      Ofcourse a backdoor is only needed in the event the EU wide mandatory traffic data retention laws fail (How many europeans would vote with these in mind this week, how many will vote period??), *and* the standard telephone tapping won`t work in getting the evidence wanted *and* your not in the netherlands which has internet tapping infrastructure more advanced then most of the telephone stuff worldwide. It was forced onto ISP`s by law, which is intented as an european standard practice soon, ask the ITU. And for the NSA, do the even need backdoors? Rumour has it their spending has tripled recently eventhough the people they are supposed to be watching (Iran) are still are using crypto broken for years. The NRO may only desire backdoor acces to the downlink stations of comercial image/weather sats just to save money. But which agancy saves money? Other then israeli ones which succesfully privatised its listening in to foreign phones by having the goverments of the world pay for having their equipment listen to calls. I guess the comverse to verint name change came with a firmware update to go to superduperuberuser version 2.0 ;-). Ofcourse having a goverment fund the people behind the backdoor is not the most smart and common practice. BTW, others (CIA/DOD/Office of strategic influence or whatever they call it this week) would want backdoor or cracked acces to sat downlink stations to block people from finding out stuff. Even weather sats reveal lots of stuff and the people operating them can`t always be asked to not release photos or weather data becouse it not always technicly war. Putting a lame default password in plain text (?) in consumer firmware is not gonna further any of their goals.

      Ofcourse the NSA may just be be looking for a real challange, imagene updating/buidling SIGINT sats to be able to focus on those very low power single 802.11 wifi nets and running airsnort. That would need this kind of funding but it beats airborne wardriving and if you can simultanously convince everyone you are coming in through a landline with a well known plaintext backdoor people will feel safe ;-)

  24. Re:anon to not karma whore by frs_rbl · · Score: 1, Funny
    If there is something worse than a karma whore, that is an anonymous karma whore...

    disgusting

    --
    This is not my opinion. Actually, it's not even an opinion. And I'm nowhere to be seen near it
  25. Google's translation is a little clearer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
    Backdoor also in new wl to firmware of Netgear

    Netgear reacted to the messages over a Backdoor in the wl to ACCESS POINT WG602 Version1 promptly with a firmware update, however the Backdoor is still present -- this time only with new user name and password. With the name one was a little creative and extended the original character string "super" too "superman". With the password Netgear obviously took forum contributions for the first message of the safety gap seriously and changed the number on 21241036. To whom however this telephone number is to belong, Netgear Germany could not say to us -- there one knew nothing from the new problem and wanted only to make itself once kundig.

    An again updated firmware design does not give it yet. Anyway the question arises whether users are still determined after the second Patzer to bring new software in. In opinion of lawyers this problem could quite be reason of enough to return the devices to the dealer and back-demand the purchase price. The salesman can try to improve the lack however the chances stand for it for the moment obviously quite badly.

  26. Just another proof that by marika · · Score: 1

    The companies don't care about the users' security nor personal stuff. I can't believe it. I am glad they don't install alarm systems.

    --
    This is totally insecure, but very convenient.
    1. Re:Just another proof that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      I am glad they don't install alarm systems.

      Many (most?) alarm companies use a default installer password. It can't be used to arm/disarm the system unless an install jumper is set.

  27. And security by obscurity... by Alwin+Henseler · · Score: 1
    Just fended of the first wave of attack!

    But probably not the next...

  28. Stupid Hackers by jwcorder · · Score: 1

    Netgear engineer, "Stupid hackers....there is no way they will ever figure out we add man onto the end of super...BAWAWAWAWAWAWAWAAAAA!!!!"

    --
    http://jayceecorder.blogspot.com
  29. Does this mean... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That if a worm was written to exploit this, those that are affected by the worm can sue Netgear for negligence ?

  30. APARENTLY they like it.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    IN THE BACK DOOR....lol someone had to say it...

  31. Anybody remember Belkin ? by haxor.dk · · Score: 1

    So, now we also have to boykott Netgear to see them crash and burn for their idiocy by placing out privacy in jeopardy. Fools! sigh.

  32. Super-Secure by Apocalypse111 · · Score: 2, Funny

    A backdoor? We're insecure? This looks like a job for... a random number generator!

    --
    There is no mod option "-1: Disagree" for a reason. "Overrated" is not an acceptable substitute. Post something instead.
  33. Re:babelfish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Does anyone have a translation for those of us who can't read babelfish?

  34. Some updates: by burgburgburg · · Score: 1
    Netgear has obviously for the first message of the [Sicherheitsl?e]??? seriously taken and the 21241036 password.

    Google's translation: With the password Netgear obviously took forum contributions for the first message of the safety gap seriously and changed the number on 21241036.

    In opinion of lawyers this problem quite serious.

    Google's translation: In opinion of lawyers this problem could quite be reason of enough to return the devices to the dealer and back-demand the purchase price. The salesman can try to improve the lack however the chances stand for it for the moment obviously quite badly.

    1. Re:Some updates: by thedillybar · · Score: 1, Troll

      Here's the final result.

      Netgear reacted to the messages of a Backdoor in the firmware of their ACCESS POINT WG602 promptly with a firmware update, however the backdoor is still present -- this time only with new user name and password. With the name one was marginally creative and extended the superuser character string "super" to "superman". With the password Netgear obviously took forum contributions for the first message of the safety gap seriously and changed the number on 21241036. To whom however this telephone number is owned, Netgear Germany could not say -- there one knew nothing from the new problem and wanted only to fix it.

      An again updated firmware design isn't being worked on. The question remains: are users still determined after the second patch to bring in more new software in? Michael Sims reports a large opening in his backdoor for all to use. In opinion of lawyers this problem could quite be reason of enough to return the devices to the dealer and back-demand the purchase price. The salesman can try to improve the lack however the chances stand for it for the moment obviously quite badly.

  35. Who reads slashdot? by tony_gardner · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I realise that this is a bit redundant, but I read the slashdot artile linked to, and what to I see but:

    Re:Fixed in new firmware, available here: (Score:3, Informative)
    by Chucky B. Bear (785810) on Saturday June 05, @03:10PM (#9345433)
    I've just upgraded to the latest firmware. It is NOT FIXED!!!! They have simply gone and changed the username and password to something else. There is STILL a default superuser account with password.

    (You can find it yourselve by just taking similiar steps as in the securityfoces article.)


    Maybe reading slashdot sometimes would be a good idea.

    1. Re:Who reads slashdot? by Chucky+B.+Bear · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Yeah I hate to say it but told you so!!! ;-) I posted that just before the securityfocus mail. Its funny how this all ended up as a Heise article now. They could've at least given me some credit for finding it.

      I did talk to a netgear support engineer yesterday and he didn't know what I was talking about, so now I'm still waiting to hear anything back from them.

    2. Re:Who reads slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they could've at least given me some credit for finding it...

      or at least a +5...

  36. ./ed by Fullmetal+Edward · · Score: 0

    Nice one old slashdot, you just revealed it to all us geeks :)

    Remind me to blame if you I ever get caught using it for less then legal means.

    --
    --- [Insert intresting Sig here]
  37. I want a job @ netgear by nomad63 · · Score: 1

    Looks like people with half brains are able to hold on to their jobs over at netgear, so, I want a job where I do not feel compelled to excel at my job, heck, I can lay an egg like this about one every hour.

    Hey netgear folks, do you want to hire me ? I promise my ideas will be even lamer than changing "super" to "superman" so your legacy won't be hurt.

    One keeps wondering how those ideas actually filter through the chain of comman in such an high visibility issue. Amazing !

    --

    __________
    The more I know people, the more I love animals
    1. Re:I want a job @ netgear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple, go into magament.

      Now, if you want the 'no-brains' job, I hear sales has an opening.

  38. This is a good fix by razmaspaz · · Score: 2, Funny

    Now the hacker has to figure out which version of the firmware one is running in order to crack the password. And they can't figure that out without logging in. So everyone is safe now.

    :-)

    --
    I tried for 5 years to come up with a clever sig...only to realize that I am not clever.
    1. Re:This is a good fix by ScytheBlade1 · · Score: 1

      Now the hacker has to figure out which version of the firmware one is running in order to crack the password. And they can't figure that out without logging in. So everyone is safe now. Yeah, lemme tell you just how hard.

      Try the original firmware password.
      If that fails, try the new firmware password.

      Everyone is not safe, they're still just as vulnerable.
      Haha, this actually adds a security issue...as long as the user is an average user who doesn't care, you can tell the firmware revision based on the password.

      Figuring out the firmware is now just as easy as logging in.

    2. Re:This is a good fix by razmaspaz · · Score: 1

      Yeah that was a joke!

      --
      I tried for 5 years to come up with a clever sig...only to realize that I am not clever.
    3. Re:This is a good fix by ScytheBlade1 · · Score: 1

      Wow.

      I am a moron.

      kthx.

    4. Re:This is a good fix by razmaspaz · · Score: 1

      Hey it happens to all of us sometimes

      --
      I tried for 5 years to come up with a clever sig...only to realize that I am not clever.
  39. Is it just me......... by p.rican · · Score: 1

    or does it almost seem easier to read the german version, than read the babelfish translation? Babelfish translations make my eyes bleed and my head hurt ( no offense to parent post )

    --

    /. --"Demented and sad....but social" -Judd Nelson

    1. Re:Is it just me......... by Three+Headed+Man · · Score: 1

      Yes, for me it is to be read in fan the German version;). English is completely heavy for me, but I the articles here under translated. I use the Babelfish sometimes around COMMENTS for posts, because English is for me very heavily.

      --
      I'm probably at the karma cap. Mod up a funny troll instead, it lightens the mood :)
  40. Re:anon to not karma whore by Mz6 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    yeah.. my fault :)

    --
    Hmmm.
  41. More like... by qualico · · Score: 2, Insightful

    cat knowledge |grep -v understanding

    There is certainly no understanding comeing through their pipe.

  42. Re:Bianry[sic] Edit by phaze3000 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The firmware is gzip compressed, so you'd need to do a bit more than just use bvi. But I suspect if you extracted the gzip'd portion, edited the firmware, re-gzipped it, put it back in the firmware and updated any crc/md5 checks in there it might work.

    --
    Blaming GW Bush for the Iraq war is like blaming Ronald McDonald for the poor quality of food.
  43. Re:anon to not karma whore by chris_mahan · · Score: 2, Funny

    I for one like my whores anonymous. It keeps things simpler...

    Oh, what exactly are we talking about again?

    --

    "Piter, too, is dead."

  44. Re:Calm down... by Doppleganger · · Score: 1

    First of all, that's not completely verified.

    Secondly, it's talking about a completely different (alleged) vulnerability.

  45. Backdoor also in new Netgear firmware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Netgear reacted to the messages of a backdoor in the firmware of their ACCESS POINT WG602 promptly with a firmware update, however the backdoor is still present -- this time only with new user name and password. They were a bit creative with the name and extended the superuser login "super" to "superman". With the 21241036 password Netgear has obviously for the first time taken security seriously. To whom however this telephone number is owned, Netgear Germany could not say -- because no one knew anything about the problem and only wanted to fix it.

    Clear enough? :)

  46. Supermaning it.... by utlemming · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I am amused. When I say the headline I just about died laughing. The sad part is that most people that have a Netgear router aren't going to update the firmware, and they probably don't even care or understand the issues involved. Further, what about all those units that are on the shelf somewhere? The problem is that Netgear has admitted now that they are not interested in security and they are not offering a secured unit. I was amused when I installed one for a friend -- she had bought the unit. No user name, just a password. I am thinking that IEEE or ANSI or whoever should adopt a standard for baseline security for routers. That way even an idiot that wants to have an open WIFI device won't have to worry about some Wardriver taking over his device. Well, all I can say is that I am happy that I was not the executive that made the Superman call.

    --
    The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
    1. Re:Supermaning it.... by gtrubetskoy · · Score: 1
      The sad part is that most people that have a Netgear router aren't going to update the firmware

      Look on the bright side - if you cannot upgrade your firmwre, _Netgear_ can do it for you!

    2. Re:Supermaning it.... by digitac · · Score: 1

      You know something? You're right. I have a NetGear router (don't laugh, I got it free), and I'm NOT going to upgrade it. Why bother updating the firmware just to change the password? Instead, mine is just going to go into the trash where it belongs and I'll set up a Linux router or something. ::Digitac

  47. 21241036 - For Backdoor Network Access, Call Jenny by Compulawyer · · Score: 4, Funny

    The new password is apparently someone's PHONE NUMBER in Germany! No idea whose, but I gleaned this tidbit by getting a Babelfish translation of the page (orig, in German). For those in the US - Is this the networking equivalent of calling Jenny? (867-5309)

    --

    Laws affecting technology will always be bad until enough techies become lawyers.

  48. Netgear has awesome products by Mustang+Matt · · Score: 1

    It's a shame, because Netgear actually has the best wireless products I've tried between netgear, dlink, linksys, and smc.

    I've had more stability and success with netgear by far. Luckily I'm not using this particular router.

    --
    The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
    1. Re:Netgear has awesome products by djmurdoch · · Score: 1

      I've had more stability and success with netgear by far. Luckily I'm not using this particular router.

      Do you trust them not to have the same flaw in their other equipment? Why?

    2. Re:Netgear has awesome products by Autumnmist · · Score: 1

      I had this exact WAP but it died on me (kept dropping connections, requiring a reset, then one day, it stopped responding to resets) after 6 months. Which very inconviently, was after Netgear's warranty expires (not even 3 months if I remember correctly).

      I paid the same amount for a Belkin router/WAP with a limited firewall built-in (CompUSA discount). More functionality, same price, and a LIFETIME warranty. I'll never go back to Netgear again, especially after this fiasco!

      --
      --- "Many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view." ~ Ben Kenobi, 'Return of the Jedi'
  49. Basically.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this is what I compare to getting your keys stolen, changing your locks, and then giving everyone a copy of the key.

  50. Re:anon to not karma whore by joranbelar · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Sure can, that's my job ;) Backdoor remains in new firmware from Netgear While Netgear may have reacted quickly to the reports of a backdoor in the firmware of their Access Point WG602 by issuing a firmware update, the backdoor itself is nevertheless still present -- this time simply with a new username and password. They were less than creative with the user name, extending the original "super" to "superman". With the password, Netgear has apparently taken the first forum reports of the security hole seriously and changed the phrase to "21241036". To whom this telephone number belongs, however, Netgear Germany could not say - nobody there knew anything about the "new" problem, first wanting to fully acquaint themselves with the issue. Another firmware update is not yet available, and regardless, the question remains whether users will be eager to apply yet another patch after the second screw-up. According to lawyers, this could open the door for end users to return the hardware to the vendor and demand a refund. While they may still try to fix the problem, at the chances of are pretty low.

  51. Article Text by Three+Headed+Man · · Score: 5, Informative
    Courtesy of this online GermanEnglish Dictionary and my German teacher, Frau Richards, whereever you are.

    Netgear has promptly reacted to the reports of a backdoor in the WLAN-Access-Point WG602 Version 1 with a Firmware-Update, however, the backdoor is still present, but with a new user name and password. They were a little creative with the name and extended the original character string "super" to "superman." With the password, Netgear has obviously taken the message of security seriously and changed the password to "21241036." However, to whom this telephone number points, Netgear did not comment. There, they knew nothing and initially only wanted to make themselves aware of the (details of the) problem.

    Again, there is not a real updated firmware design yet. The question arises whether users are still determined--after the second patch--to get new software. In the lawyer's opinions, this problem could be reason enough to take back the device to the retailer and receive a refund of the purchase price. For now, the retailer can try to fix the shortcoming, however, the chances of that are not very good.

    --
    I'm probably at the karma cap. Mod up a funny troll instead, it lightens the mood :)
    1. Re:Article Text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Netgear has obviously taken the message of security seriously should read more like "Netgear seems to have taken the discussion around the first report of the security problem seriously" and refers to a post in the Heise security forum where someone suggested changing the password to a telephone number.

      Again, there is not a real updated firmware design yet. should read "There is no newly (meaning after Heise published the new login data) updated firmware version."

      I guess your German is better than my English but maybe I could help out a little.

    2. Re:Article Text by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 1

      oh *THAT* takes me back...I had a Frau Richards too....lol Where'd ya go to high school? Rochester NY here

      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    3. Re:Article Text by Milo+of+Kroton · · Score: 1

      Central PA.

  52. Sound familiar? by merlin_jim · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Was anyone else reminded of some of Mitnick's work where he'd call the manufacturer of the equipment to get the backdoor password? That most of the people using it didn't even know it had? And they gave it to him over the phone...

    --
    I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!
  53. Where's Klunk.... by mikael · · Score: 1

    Reading this translation, I could help but think of klunk, who is probably now working as a technical writer for Japanese instruction manuals.

    --
    Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
  54. Re:anon to not karma whore by joranbelar · · Score: 1

    Oops, sorry for the lack of line breaks. Thank God my job doesn't involve HTML formatting....

  55. Are there others? by NLG · · Score: 1

    I recently purchased a Netgear WGT624 v2 so I could have wi-fi at home for my laptop. Does anyone know if this FW/Router also suffers from the same problem? I can't find any info so far, but it doesn't seem unreasonable to me that ALL Netgear products could have similar exploitable backdoors.

    --
    Flash is the Herpes of the Internet.
    your.opinion > /dev/null
    1. Re:Are there others? by pegr · · Score: 1

      I recently purchased a Netgear WGT624 v2 so I could have wi-fi at home for my laptop. Does anyone know if this FW/Router also suffers from the same problem?

      Why don't you port scan the external interface? If you get a hot port, you're in trouble...

    2. Re:Are there others? by nolife · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't know either but you could try the existing known accounts for yourself on your own router. This won't help if a backdoor is there with different credentials but provide piece of mind that the two well known ones either do or do not work.
      Getting off topic here but the main advantage of full disclosure with bugs and similar issues like this is you have the ability to verify and test for yourself. Sure beats getting an email that a patch is available and you have no idea what it fixed or how it fixed it.

      --
      Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
    3. Re:Are there others? by Fjord · · Score: 1

      that isn't helpful. The netgear has port 80 open for administrative purposes. The problem is that if you put in the super/password (or post patch superman/21241036) user/pass combo, even if you have changed from the default admin/password, you get access. It's a backdoor into the admin screens.

      For this person, I would try the super/password combo on any admin login.

      --
      -no broken link
    4. Re:Are there others? by pegr · · Score: 1

      that isn't helpful. The netgear has port 80 open for administrative purposes. The problem is that if you put in the super/password (or post patch superman/21241036) user/pass combo, even if you have changed from the default admin/password, you get access. It's a backdoor into the admin screens.

      If the admin interface is active on the external interface (don't care if there's a backdoor account or not) and cannot be disabled, the device is broken. Beat the engineer, preferably with the device in question.

      (There! That's helpful! ;)

    5. Re:Are there others? by Fjord · · Score: 1

      My limited understanding of the issue is that it is not. It is only available to those on the LAN side of the router. The problem is that a wardriver has access if they are physically close enough.

      If there is truly WAN access, then this is really bad.

      --
      -no broken link
  56. Re:Calm down... by bogie · · Score: 4, Informative

    First of all we are talking about a Netgear Product so what does Linksys's problem have to do with this? Second of all if you would bother to read the responses in the article you linked to, you would see that some people have already proved that its not a hoax with regards to the Linksys product.

    --
    If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  57. Resonable fix maybe? by SkreamNet · · Score: 1

    Maybe they could change the firmware updater itself to randomly change the password, alternately ask the user for a password for the 'super' user. This might be acceptable if indeed it's a hardware flaw and there's no way to simply remove this super user from the system.

  58. wow by nuclearpenguin · · Score: 1

    I'm just happy my router isnt affected. Why in the world would they do this? They should know we can find out. Sometimes I wonder...

  59. Could be new feature... by Creedo+Kid · · Score: 0

    If they give out a program to change the backdoor login/password and rechecksum.

    --
    Business is Business and Business must grow, Regardless of crummies in tummies you know... -Onceler
  60. Re:Calm down... by teknikl · · Score: 2, Informative

    Wait - the false report was about Linksys - NOT about NETGEAR.

    SO now the Linksys is ok and the Netgear is not. Someone buy me a program so I can tell the players apart.

  61. Obligatory Spaceballs reference by BRSloth · · Score: 1

    The password is '21241036'!

    Remember me to change the password of my briefcase.

    [Or something like that]

    1. Re:Obligatory Spaceballs reference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Remember me to change the password of my briefcase.

      Must be the subtitles from the Korean bootleg version.

  62. Re:Calm down... by spitzak · · Score: 1

    That's for Linksys, not Netgear!

  63. You ruined it! by VanWEric · · Score: 1

    Way to ruin EVERYTHING.

    How are we supposed to keep one step ahead of the enemy hackers when /. parades our top secret passcodes around the world for all to see?

    Now ehere are we going to find something as secure as 'superman'?

    --
    www.olin.edu
  64. Re:anon to not karma whore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sicherheits = safety (heh guess you can learn something by flying lufthansa)

  65. Not the first boner NetGear's pulled by daveschroeder · · Score: 4, Informative

    Flawed Routers Flood University of Wisconsin Internet Time Server

    http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~plonka/netgear-sntp/

    Abstract:

    "In May 2003, the University of Wisconsin - Madison found that it was the recipient of a continuous large scale flood of inbound Internet traffic destined for one of the campus' public Network Time Protocol (NTP) servers. The flood traffic rate was hundreds-of-thousands of packets-per-second, and hundreds of megabits-per-second.

    Subsequently, we have determined the sources of this flooding to be literally hundreds of thousands of real Internet hosts throughout the world. However, rather than having originated as a malicious distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack, the root cause is actually a serious flaw in the design of hundreds of thousands of one vendor's low-cost Internet products targeted for residential use. The unexpected behavior of these products presents a significant operational problem for UW-Madison for years to come.

    This document includes the initial public disclosure of details of these products' serious design flaw. Furthermore, it discusses our ongoing, multifaceted approach toward the solution which involves the University, the products' manufacturer, the relevant Internet standards (RFCs), and the public Internet service and user communities."

    1. Re:Not the first boner NetGear's pulled by Skapare · · Score: 1

      And that document specifically declines (see the FAQ at the bottom) to discuss the legal liabilities Netgear incurred. I think there is substantial interest in that, even if it is simply a statement like "Netgear is covering all costs incurred". Taxpayers of Wisconsin would probably want to know. Students who pay tuition would probably want to know.

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    2. Re:Not the first boner NetGear's pulled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It also mentioned SMC had the same problems.

  66. learned their security strategy from microsoft by straponego · · Score: 3, Interesting

    By issuing this form of a fix, Netgear is stating that they are not just incompetent, they are deliberately so, and they think everybody else is as stupid as they are. I've rarely seen such negligence and contempt for customers. Well, not that rarely: The Winnuke Patch

  67. What really happened.. by flux · · Score: 3, Funny

    ..is that they lost the source, and all they could do was to binary patch the firmware image.

    Sad, but true ;-(.

    (or not)

    1. Re:What really happened.. by cpghost · · Score: 1

      Or they lost the only programmer who was able to read the source. The usual ratio 99% sales, 1% R&D applies here too.

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
  68. Security fix? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This is preaching to the choir anyway. Who actually updates the firmware on anything? People who are at least knowlegeable to know what firmware is. Those are the same people who probably change the default username and password. Anyone not thinking of firmware updates, is also probably to lazy (or not knowlegeable enough) to change the firmware OR the default username/password.

  69. Here's why they didn't remove it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Yes, you're asking yourself "why didn't they just remove it, instead of changing it? Why was it there in the first place?"

    Well, it seems pretty obvious to me... it's supposed to be there.

    This shows that it was Netgear's intention to purposely put back doors into the product. The reason "why" is not really evident. I can leave that up to the tinfoil hat crowd.

  70. Secure Backdoors by DreadSpoon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Now, I'm not going to even start discussing whether the product *should* have a backdoor. There are many reasons for including them, and many obvious reasons to not.

    What I want to know is, why bother with user names and passwords in the backdoor? An SSH tunnel using only public key authentication would pretty much solve the problem of someone examining the firmware for the login information. You could also include multiple keys and provide a public key revokation server that the units automatically update from, as well as a general key update server that the units will grab new keys from using a callback mechanism (to guarantee that the key update servers have a valid private key for connecting to the unit).

    1. Re:Secure Backdoors by NevarMore · · Score: 1

      Egh, no. You have some good ideas, but they miss the mark just a bit. I like that you are thinking a little more in depth about security though.

      The glaring issue is 'a server that the units autoupdate from'. This is a problem in general because it is trivial to prevent it from updating itself. This is a problem for professionals because they may have a firewall that prevents it from updating, or prefer to do manual updates. What if an auto-update borks a custom configuration? Who is responsible then?

      The whole scheme is complex. Coding things on a general PC is easy and memory is almost free.Putting an SSH server, the key storage, and the maintenance code into hardware is expensive and very complicated. Running such things as software on the router is less hard, but would be much slower than in hardware.

      I don't know who said it, or if I figured it out on my own, but it bears repeating. Security does not mean that something is safe. Security increases the amout of time, money, and resources that must be used to gain acess. At present security is only secure because the requirements to break it are *currently* out of reach.

    2. Re:Secure Backdoors by dissy · · Score: 1

      The method used by most hardware providers is a password based on some form of hash dirived from the serial number printed on the unit.

      Auto grabbing anything from the internet is generally 'bad'.
      Although the worst case in your solution would be an attacker can revoke all the keys and remove the backdoor, its still best to not rely on internet communications at all.

      Backdoor passwords are almost required, because if they are not, the company would be bad-mouthed by all the morons who lock themselfs out and the company can't fix their problem for them.

      Generally its safe to assume that posession=ownership, and a serial printed on the unit can be read by a person who has the hardware in their posession.

      For companys that can 'afford' the cost of hardware, there is usually also a switch or button that activly needs manipulated to enable the backdoor.

      If you can't assure your networks physical security, chances are computer security won't help you anyways.

  71. blimey by doofusclam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's crap. There may be a multitude of reasons why they couldn't remove the backdoor (no access to source code, the guy who wrote it was on holiday, whatever...) but they could have at least changed the password with a hex editor to something that was difficult to type from a keyboard, low-ascii values for example.

    1. Re:blimey by Skapare · · Score: 1

      Whoever does have access to the source code is who should be responsible for fixing it according to the requirements of whatever manufacturers are incorporating it into their products. If Netgear's own staff didn't write it, they either know who did, or know who knows, and can track it back to there and demand a secure version.

      Very likely, someone wanted this feature for support reasons (let's not jump on the spy reason bandwagon just yet). Someone, somewhere, might be whining that support costs will go up, and customer satisfaction will go down, because more units will have to be returned to be fixed, rather than guide the customer through the setup (which is not going to work on the 75% of the population that can't follow directions).

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    2. Re:blimey by jonfelder · · Score: 1

      That's what a reset button on the device and a default password is for. Have customer hit reset button and then guide them through setup.

    3. Re:blimey by Skapare · · Score: 1

      It should be more than just reset. For example, connect power while the reset button is held down and hold it for 3 seconds. A mere reset should not erase the configuration. And even then, the default start menu should offer to restore the original configuration if there is one present with a valid checksum.

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    4. Re:blimey by jonfelder · · Score: 1

      That's normally how it works...or you have to hold it for 30 seconds or something.

      As far as restoring the config...we're talking about a consumer level device here. If the consumer borked the config enough to need to call tech support, it's probably good not to restore it.

      Besides configuring one of these guys takes all of like 1 minute or so.

      On commercial devices one typically dumps the config to a file and backs it up.

  72. Re:21241036 - For Backdoor Network Access, Call Je by bcmm · · Score: 1

    And now we are even trying to slashdot phone lines...
    Where will it end?

    --
    # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
    Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
  73. I call troll, hello, anyone listening ? by spellraiser · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Ok, everyone read the following carefully:

    The parent of this comment is a troll. It contains the spurious phrase: 'Michael Sims reports a large opening in his backdoor for all to use', which is certainly not in the original article.

    Got that? Read the parent, see the line (it is the second to last line in the parent). Did you mod that comment as Informative? Then you should be ashamed of yourself.

    Why do people mod comments if they haven't read them? Seems like a very perversive kind of logic indeed.

    --
    I hear there's rumors on the Slashdots
    1. Re:I call troll, hello, anyone listening ? by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 0
      It contains the spurious phrase: 'Michael Sims reports a large opening in his backdoor for all to use', which is certainly not in the original article.
      Maybe not, but that's only because the authors of the original article don't know michael.
      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
  74. Kind of... by Mustang+Matt · · Score: 1

    Because when I port scan it, nothing responds.

    --
    The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
    1. Re:Kind of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And when you portscan that particular netgear router, you get a response and can determine there's a backdoor? No offense, just curious...

    2. Re:Kind of... by Mustang+Matt · · Score: 1

      I don't have one so I can't say for sure, but I'm assuming so.

      --
      The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
    3. Re:Kind of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That means it's either defective, unplugged, or you're scanning the wrong IP.

  75. With my slightly-rusty German by kubalaa · · Score: 1

    Though Netgear reacted promptly with a firmware update to the news of a backdoor in the WLAN access point WG602, the backdoor is nevertheless still present -- this time with a new username and password. The name was handled with little creativity, extended from the original string "super" to "superman". In the case of the password, Netgear had obviously taken forum discussion [the link is a post by someone who used a hex editor to change the password to their phone number] of the first news of the security hole to heart and changed the number to 21241036. To whom this phone number belongs, though, Netgear Germany could not tell us -- they had not heard of the new problem and wanted to look into it first.

    There is not yet a newly updated Firmware version. Anyways, there is the question of whether users will still be willing after this second screw-up to install new software. In the opinion of lawyers this problem could be quite sufficient ground to return the devices to dealers and demand a refund. The vendor can certainly try to touch up the deficiency, though at the moment the chances of that are obviously quite poor.

    --

    "If you look 'round the table and can't tell who the sucker is, it's you." -- Quiz Show

  76. Re:21241036 - For Backdoor Network Access, Call Je by pklong · · Score: 1

    I feel sorry for the person whos number that is. You just know that all german Slashdotters will be dialling that now.

    --

    Philip

    Signatures are broken

  77. Change the fix to something else! by netringer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Doesn't having the username and password in the clear mean that anybody who knows how to use a Hex editor can make their own patch? Just find those two strings and change them to something else, or better some sequence of bits that don't map to text.

    Is there a checksum or CRC check in the firmware loader on the router that keeps you from being able to do that?

    --
    Ever dream you could fly? Get up from the Flight Sim. I Fly
    1. Re:Change the fix to something else! by TwistedSpring · · Score: 3, Informative

      Is there a checksum or CRC check in the firmware loader on the router that keeps you from being able to do that?

      Almost certainly. Vendors normally checksum firmware to avoid the possibility of flashing the hardware with corrupt firmware data. However, given Netgear's track record, you could probably flash it with a JPEG file and it'd accept it OK.

      This sort of thing makes me wonder what backdoors are in other firmware and software that have not yet been discovered. I'm glad that there are people like SecurityFocus looking out for these exploits. Endless numbers of ADSL modems, routers and other equipment seem to have backdoors in them. I'm glad I route my ADSL through a switch and Slackware :)

  78. Firmware 1.5.67 doesn't take this password... by $ASANY · · Score: 1, Interesting
    I tried it on my WG602 with firmware revision 1.5.67, and this username/password doesn't work. Neither did the first combination provided.

    Now maybe there are some firmware versions out there that have these vulnerabilities, but I haven't been able to confirm either report and am beginning to wonder whether any of these stories are true. Of course, my standard practice of getting the latest firmware when I buy some equipment may have shielded me from these problems, and there are probably plenty (fools?) out there that don't do this and may have opened themselves up. But to see two vulnerability reports I cannot confirm makes me wonder whether this is some sort of disinformation campaign.

    I look at the comments on this thread and am amazed that the supposedly technically competent can rush to judgement so quickly and with so little evidence. Were this to hit the mainstream media, can you imagine how this could change the marketplace, even if the report isn't true?

    Maybe I should be buying some Cisco stock...

    1. Re:Firmware 1.5.67 doesn't take this password... by Chucky+B.+Bear · · Score: 4, Informative
      Maybe you typed wrong. ;-) I can confirm without any doubt that both versions 1.5.67 and 1.7.14 from the netgear site has these backdoors installed.

      As a matter of fact it was me who found the 1.7.14 username and password and posted it to securityfocus after updating my firmware from 1.5.67(which I tested with the super username and password) to 1.7.14.

    2. Re:Firmware 1.5.67 doesn't take this password... by jaysonemery · · Score: 1

      Does anyone know for sure if this problem has been fixed in 1.7.15?

  79. Re:Netgear has awesome security awareness by Secrity · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How can you be sure that the backdoor ID to your gear isn't batman and that the passward isn't 46386124? I realize that any proprietary software can have backdor passwords in it. Netgear has shown that at least one of their products has a backdoor. When Netgear was given the chance to act horrified that somebody put a backdoor in one of their products and remove it, they decided to just change the backdoor name and password. This gives me LOTS of confidence in the security awareness of Netwgear products. You are trusting the security of your wireless connectivity to a company that knowingly maintains a backdoor in at least one of it's products.

  80. Re:anon to not karma whore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Okay, native German speaker trying to translate:

    Even though Netgear quickly reacted to a backdoor in its WLAN-Access-Point WG602 Version 1, the backdoor is still there - only with a changed username and password. Netgear wasn't very creative on the name and extended the original "super" to "superman". With the password, Netgear has obviously taken posts in the forums seriously(*) and has changed the number to 21241036. Netgear Germany didn't want to comment on the owner of the phone number - they didn't yet know about the problem and wanted to check back first.

    A newly updated firmware version doesn't exist yet. Anyway, it is doubtful whether users are still willing to install new software after this second goof-up. According to lawyers, this problem could well be grounds to return the devices to the dealer and demand a full refund. The dealer could try to mend the defect, but the chances for that are obviously slim at the moment.(**)

    *) Refers to a heise forum post pertaining to the original article where one poster suggested to use one's phone number as password.
    **) Reference to German law: If a bought product is deficient, the dealer has to either mend the deficiencies or take the product back for a full refund. Apperantly, some lawyers think that Netgear's goof-ups make their product sufficiently deficient for this law to take effect.

  81. human translation by Ozan · · Score: 1

    Although Netgear reacted quickly to reports about a backdoor in the WLAN-Access-Point WG602 Version1 with a firmware-update the backdoor still remains, only with a new user name and password. When changing the name Netgear showed not much creatitity since the original string "super" was simply enlarged to "superman". Regarding the password Netgear apparently took seriously some comments of the heise board and changed the number to 21241036. Asked about whose telephone number this is Netgear Germany was not able to make any comment, as it was unaware of the new problem and going to investigate it first.

    A newly updated firmware-version is not available yet. Anyhow the question is whether the users are willing to replace the software after the second error. In the opinion of lawyers this is a valid reason for users to be entitled to return the devices in exchange for their money. Although dealers could hypotheticaly fix the inadequacy, chances to do this successfully apparently are not the best.

  82. Re:21241036 - For Backdoor Network Access, Call Je by ezzzD55J · · Score: 1
    If it's a phone number, i wonder whose it is and why it was chosen?

    If it's not, what would the significance be? The factorisation is: 2 2 461 11519 but that doesn't look interesting to me.

    Googling for it I only find, as interesting reference:

    • An entry for something called dipeptidyl anminopeptidase that sounds like a protein or enzyme
    But I'm sure that's not it ;)
  83. Not Accidental by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This simply shows that the backdoor was not a mistake. Netgear wants to have this backdoor on your router, for whatever reason they have, that's all !

  84. Accuracy in reporting? by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 0, Redundant

    This is neither amusing nor is it a fix.

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
  85. Does it matter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doesn't most routers have well-known/published administrator logins?

    Not really a problem for ethernet-based ones, as you prevent access from external ip's using filters.

    I'm no WIFI guru, but WPA or something should be plenty for preventing unauthorized 'local' connections..?

  86. 21241036? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh wait...I think I can get this one...Zizaloeg? Zizaiobg? Eh, my l3375p34| is a little |2usty.

  87. Linksys is just as bad by MudflapSoftware · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I have an older linksys BEFWS11 (4 port 10/100 switch, 802.11b, internet router/firewall). I was having terrible issues getting *any* of my pcmcia and pci wireless cards to talk to this device. I was also having problems my custom settings getting reset to factory defaults, etc. Calling tech support was useless. They recommended that i *downgrade* to an earlier version of the firmware, which was known to contain a large number of security vulnerabilities. That wasn't gonna happen. They also thought that I might want to send the unit in for testing and possible repair. Of course the warranty on the unit expired about a month earlier. So, after purchasing a cheapo blitzz wireless internet router @ walmart for $40 (which works flawlessly I might add), I noticed that linksys had updated the firmware. I installed the newest version, and whammo they fixed the wireless problem..... by disabling the wireless tranceiver entirely. Another call to linksys tech support was fruitless, as they recommended that I just go and buy a WRT54G.

  88. Official Statement from Netgear? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anyone know if Netgear has made an official statement regarding these vulnerabilities or what their refund policy is when it comes to these tainted products? I've got one of these at home. Until this, I had been quite satisfied with the product, actually, but after having read this I would like to get a refund and switch vendors simply on principle.

  89. Refund? by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 1

    Since they did this, should we all demand refunds since this make their routers so insecure, it is unusable?

  90. Security through obscurity? by lancomandr · · Score: 1

    I call it backdooring through closed source.

    --

    "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

  91. I have to change the combination on my luggage. by chicagoan · · Score: 1

    '21241036', That's the same combination on my luggage!

  92. Thanks for posting the login on slashdot by Lispy · · Score: 0, Troll

    I know that the fix is a joke but posting the login on slashdot is irresponsible. I mean, if I had this router: Thank you.

    1. Re:Thanks for posting the login on slashdot by Ancil · · Score: 1

      Right.

      I'm sure the type of hacker who would exploit this really needs slashdot to clue him in.

      He would never be able to recover the username and password from the BIOS file, where it's stored in plaintext . He wouldn't just google for it. He doesn't subscribe to BugTraq. Right.

  93. Re:21241036 - For Backdoor Network Access, Call Je by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    area codes start with 0 in germany
    0212-41036 would be a valid german phonenumber. the area code would be from solingen or around that area

  94. Press release like in the dot-com boom... by rice_burners_suck · · Score: 2, Funny
    For immediate release. June 8, 2004. Netgear (NASDAQ: BLAH) today announced immediate release of new technology designed to eliminate enterprise security threats by thwarting hackers. By leveraging innovative technologies, content providers streamline compelling enterprise solutions.

    The technology, which allows anyone to access enterprise networks when they enter 'superman' for the username and and '21241036' for the password, frees enterprises from worrying about security issues and allows IT managers to focus on implementing talking paperclips on enterprise desktops. "We are excited about the new technology," commented Steve Hjarkblonka in an interview. "For the first time since the invention of computers, the threat of security intrusions has been completely eliminated. Enterprises can now enjoy 100% unbreakable security."

    Geoff Nikreny, chief security officer with Endostar Inc, calls the secure-by-default approach, in which once-vulnerable features are patched, a "mistake" that will lead to deployment confusion. But he doesn't know what he's talking about anyway. So for 100% unbreakable security, buy Netgear.

    Offer good while supplies last.

  95. That's what happens when you rely on outsourcing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a perfect example of why outsourcing your development and support to India will fail. Those guys are way to inexperienced to know what to do properly.

    Netgear canned most of their guys in Santa Clara, and now are relying on India for their fixes, which produce results like this.

    Way to go!

  96. No no no! They got it all wrong! by Luxury+P.+Yacht · · Score: 1
    They replaced the old user name 'super' with 'superman', and changed the old password to '21241036'.

    See, here's the problem: Superman's password is Batman's phone number! Think of the confusion and mayhem that is sure to result from this. We all know that only Commisioner Gordon should have that number.

    --
    Bush should have died, not Reagan -- Morrissey
    Morrissey rides a cockhorse -- The Warlock Pinchers
  97. According to Netgear... by TheSpoom · · Score: 3, Informative
    --
    It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
    - E. Debs
    1. Re:According to Netgear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I would have thought the link refers to the "fix" we're discussing here.

    2. Re:According to Netgear... by ScarletEmerald · · Score: 1

      Yes- the new password will be "LexLuthor".

    3. Re:According to Netgear... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Well, the web page has today's date on it (June 8), so I presume they're talking about a fix that hasn't been released yet.

      Still, I sure hope that they specifically noted that their just recently issued "fix" was a "temporary patch until we can get a real fix ready".

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  98. Superman by norminator · · Score: 1

    It's a bird... It's a plane... It's a router flying off the roof of my building!

  99. don't moderate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=110385&cid=936 5945

    Post was better suiteed as a reply to the post above.

  100. No harm, no foul by IncohereD · · Score: 1

    The fact that the backdoor existed at all makes them liable, IMO, because it proactively defeats the supposed security they used to sell their product.

    Liable for what, though? Has anyone shown any damages yet??

    1. Re:No harm, no foul by gfxguy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not as far as I know, but if I were a business I wouldn't have to have actual damages from an attacker to claim that I had to take my computers offline while the security risk was fixed, therefore costing my business an estimated $X.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    2. Re:No harm, no foul by IncohereD · · Score: 1

      Not as far as I know, but if I were a business I wouldn't have to have actual damages from an attacker to claim that I had to take my computers offline while the security risk was fixed, therefore costing my business an estimated $X.

      Aren't these clearly consumer grade, el-cheapo WIFI devices? Any serious business - if they even used these - would have them inside a firewall.

    3. Re:No harm, no foul by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Yes, but I was just making a point about potential financial impact even when someone doesn't exploit the back door. As a home user, the damage might be significantly less, but I might still take my computers offline while I replace the parts (as if my time isn't valuable just because I'm not "on the clock"), while I'm still paying for my high speed internet access.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
  101. They should be sued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .. misuse and copyright infringement to the Superman brand.
    Where are the DC Comics's lawyers ?

  102. Has Linksys done ANYTHING regarding their backdoor by funkdid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Over the weekend I purchased a Linksys wireless G "router" for my sis and brother-in-law and searched for an updated firmware. I was surprised to not find one. The last Linksys firmware is 2.02.7 from 3/17/2004. I would have bet money that Linksys would have a fix before Netgear did, especialy with Cisco being the parent company. At least Netgear made a shoddy attempt to fix their problem.

    --

    I boycott signatures

  103. Re:Has Linksys done ANYTHING regarding their backd by funkdid · · Score: 1
    I would still take a Linksys product over a Netgear product anyday.

    I tried Netgear in the past and wasn't very happy with them. I've never had an issue with Linksys. I like their interface (improved once the Cisco logo appeared). I find their wireless products to work well and other then the backdoor have no complaints about any of their products.

    --

    I boycott signatures

  104. Security battle: netgear vs M$ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    netgear has M$ beat hands down

  105. In other news by jamonterrell · · Score: 3, Funny

    Netgear has posted a whopping 1300 firmware design jobs on monster.com!

    --
    I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
    1. Re:In other news by Phurd+Phlegm · · Score: 2, Funny
      Netgear has posted a whopping 1300 firmware design jobs on monster.com!
      Oops--that was just their monster.com password. Sorry for any confusion that might have resulted.
    2. Re:In other news by pyrrhonist · · Score: 1
      I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.

      4 works pretty well, too. UK counters can try 6.

      --
      Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
    3. Re:In other news by jamonterrell · · Score: 1

      How could "UK counters" count it in any way that would get 6? 6 would always result in two fingers being up... either ring finger and middle finger or index and middle...

      --
      I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
    4. Re:In other news by pyrrhonist · · Score: 1
      6 would always result in two fingers being up... either ring finger and middle finger or index and middle...

      EXACTLY!

      --
      Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
  106. damages? by IncohereD · · Score: 1

    I think the owners of these units should file a class action lawsuit, though i'm not even sure that's possible due to the EULA. If the EULA does get in the way then

    I mentioned this elsewhere, but how can you file a lawsuit if no one can show any damages?? Where is the link to someone who had data stolen because of this? How important was it? Or did the attacker just manage to use some of their bandwidth? Did that cost them money?

    No harm, no foul. You can't have a class action lawsuit when not even one member of the class can show any evidence.

    1. Re:damages? by GreyyGuy · · Score: 1

      The harm is in they purchased a security device and then found out that it is intentionally not secure. I don't know the legalese to describe that- fraud maybe? - but if you buy something that is sold with the intent of doing something, and find out that it doesn't and the maker of it made it so it doesn't, that sounds actionable to me.

    2. Re:damages? by IncohereD · · Score: 1

      The harm is in they purchased a security device and then found out that it is intentionally not secure.

      But if no one is actually breaking in you have no case. It's like saying "it's easy to make a master key for my brand of lock." It probably is, but unless people start taking advantage of that, you have no case. You can't sue someone for potential or theoretical damages.

    3. Re:damages? by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 1

      >I mentioned this elsewhere, but how can you file a lawsuit if no one can show any damages?

      What about the price of the device? The owners are out good money, seventy to a hundred dollars each, for seriously defective equipment.

  107. The password by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is keyed to the serial number.

  108. Re:21241036 - For Backdoor Network Access, Call Je by Compulawyer · · Score: 1

    They were dialing it long before I posted my comment - the article was up for a long time before I got a translation.

    --

    Laws affecting technology will always be bad until enough techies become lawyers.

  109. don't get it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why so much fuss ?
    At least, they choose a good password
    21241036 ...

    See ? It's fairly long, has five distinct characters, no noticeable pattern...

    Come on, dont be so negative. I'd bet that
    no hacker will be able to find out that the password is 21241036

  110. Why post this? by simetra · · Score: 0

    Really, isn't there something slightly immoral, possibly illegal about posting such security info for the world to see? Sure, it's dumb of them. But I think it shows a lack of editorial integrity to post such here.

    --

    "Would it kill you to put down the toilet seat?" -- Maya Angelou
    1. Re:Why post this? by Fjord · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Really, isn't there something slightly immoral, possibly illegal about putting a backdoor into your product that allows anyone access to it, with no way to disable it, and THEN, when you are caught, you blame "the vendor that packaged the device for" you, and THEN you release a patch that claims to fix the backdoor, but really just leaves it there with a different password?

      --
      -no broken link
    2. Re:Why post this? by simetra · · Score: 1

      Sure, but still, why broadcast to the world the username/password? Is it for the neener-neener-I-got-your-password pleasure?

      --

      "Would it kill you to put down the toilet seat?" -- Maya Angelou
    3. Re:Why post this? by Fjord · · Score: 1

      No, it's to make people wake up and realize this is still a problem. It's so that people can try this themselves and prove it's not an urban legend or FUD. It's to give the company (NetGear) notice that people won't stand for this shit, and they can't get away with it. The linked article has the user/pass combo, but it's in German, so English speakers wouldn't be able to try this out on their "fixed" systems.

      --
      -no broken link
  111. dammit by Cybrr · · Score: 1

    "If someone paid you to paint a building, as they trust you will do a better job...

    --
    Why did GEAR crush RDP?
    1. Re:dammit by XMyth · · Score: 1

      Thank you. That was very confusing. I kept re-reading it thinking I was missing something.

  112. mod parent +5 Funny?(nt) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    blah blah blah

  113. Outsourcing security from a net security product? by Sleepy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ah, yes, the lovely irony of a security company outsourcing their own product's security.

    Nothing like trusting your future to some shady fly-by-night low-bidder who's not an employee. Whoever at Netgear argued this process saves money, I almost pity you. Almost.

    Although in this case, you can't argue that specs called FOR a backdoor... but maybe there were no specs at all.

    I don't blame them for this "quick fix".. as a longtime Software QA engineer I can tell you it takes more than 1 day to test something, unless you're willing to accept the risk that the fix could be worse. I'm willing to bet the OEM developer is probably just a one or two man shop, has no QA and might not even have source code control.

    off-topic:
    I run m0n0wall, a BSD distribution just for firewalls & routers. It doesn't need a hard drive so it's quiet.

    I even yanked the CPU fan off the AMD K6/450 it is running on. CAUTION: passive cooling a CPU risks burning out the processor. To prevent this I fitted a stock AMD CPU sink from an Athlon 1800, and made a small duct for the power supply to draw air over the CPU (this was an OLD old ATX case with the PS directly above the CPU so it was easy).

    Works great!

    Too bad you can't upload monowall into consumer routers. I think this is the next step. Some vendor will start making it very easy to do such a thing (discoveries like the Linksys WRT54G hacking do not count).

  114. Anyone seen this in the GPL listings of the code? by OmniGeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The firmware for this box (or at least some of it) is offered for download on Netgear's site. I'm looking through the source, but I haven't seen anything relevant yet.

    Has anyone seen where the backdoor is coded into the system? (Hint: if it's NOT in the source anywhere, Netgear is violating GPL here).

    --

    "My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on espresso."
  115. holy crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just realized I think I have one of these at home. I never thought about ti before because I only use it for it's router capabilities (got it for a deal where it was cheaper then just a router)... boy, what a mistake.

    thanks Netgear, combined with your tech support team headed up by "bob" (who has an awefully thick Indian accent for a "bob") I'm never EVER buying your crap again.

    1. Re:holy crap by DrVomact · · Score: 1
      Anybody know if this applies to any of Netgear's wired products? I have a Netgear router at home (FR[somemore_numbers]). I disabled remote admin on it. Would that make a difference? Man, I'm glad I resisted the temptation to go with WiFi, at least.

      Thanks, /. Now I can worry until I get home from work...

      --
      Great men are almost always bad men--Lord Acton's Corollary
  116. Following orders literally, perhaps? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    Hm. J. Random Maintainance Engineer hands in a good-faith estimate of the cost of fixing this backdoor properly to the massed PHBs only to be told it's too expensive and asked for an alternative:

    "Well, I suppose we could just change the username and password..."

    "DO IT!"

    "If you say so, sir"

    Pure speculation, of course.

  117. Has anyone looked at the website? by Xugumad · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's just that, according to the site, there's no fix yet:

    http://kbserver.netgear.com/kb_web_files/n101383.a sp

    Now, there is a firmware from the 4th:

    http://kbserver.netgear.com/support_details.asp?dn ldID=735

    that claims to fix the problem, but I'm tempted to suggest what's happened is they've changed the username and password while they test a full fix. After all, changing data is generally less likely to break stuff than changing code...

    1. Re:Has anyone looked at the website? by Xugumad · · Score: 1

      Well, they've now changed the website. Could someone with one of these routers update to the new firmware (the one released on the 8th), and see if it's actually fixes the problem?

  118. There goes another piece of FUD by baywulf · · Score: 1

    The common saying with free software is "who can you sue when something goes wrong." Well you can sue Netgear in this case but in a class action suit only the lawyers get rich. The most compensation the actual victims will get is a $10 rebate on the next Netgear purchase. What you really want is the problem not to have occured in the first place. I believe that if this was truely open source software, there are enough paranoid enough people reviewing the code for back doors like this before it went to far. Personally I prefer to deal with people or companies I can trust than that I can sue.

    On a side note I noticed that this SOHO NAS server I bought also has a password hidden in its firmware. Fortunately it requires some minor hardware modifications to enable a serial port needs to be made before this is possible so the security implications are minimal.

  119. The real question is... by MattGWU · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...how many times did they use the generator before settling on the number to use? Nobody in the history of the world has been satisfied by the FIRST random number generated!

    "No....no...no...maybe if it had a '7'. AH! Bingo!" -- Netgear Security Engineer

    --
    "These people look deep within my soul and assign me a number based on the order in which I joined" --Homer re:
  120. Re:21241036 - For Backdoor Network Access, Call Je by mackman · · Score: 1

    You can bet it's the home phone number of the guy who put in the backdoor in the first place. What better way to reward an employee for putting a backdoor in their product?

  121. FVS318 by Dalroth · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Man this sucks. I've got an FVS318. While, thankfully it's not the router that is the cause of this particular ruckus, it's a Netgear product.

    I like it. It's a very solid, reliable firewall/router. I've had it for a number of years now, and Netgear to this day continues to put out new firmware updates that not only fix bugs, but implement new features. It works well, and I always liked it better than my friend's Linksys.

    But this whole crisis makes me really really leary... How do I know there isn't a backdoor in my firewall/router as well? The fact is, now I don't.

    Getting a Linksys that can run a custom Linux distribution becomes more appealing every single day. This may be what finally pushes me over the edge.

    Bryan

    1. Re:FVS318 by evilviper · · Score: 1
      How do I know there isn't a backdoor in my firewall/router as well? The fact is, now I don't.

      Now you don't? What? Are you saying that before now you did know it was free of back-doors?

      The fact is, when you buy this type of closed-box network device, you always run this risk. In fact, you run this risk with any network device, but having a master-password for something like your satellite reciever isn't such a serious issue, so everyone just lets things like that slide.

      And besides this, even if you were certain there was no backdoor, that wouldn't rule-out the possibility that the software they've used could be vulnerable...
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    2. Re:FVS318 by Ronin+Developer · · Score: 1

      1. Turn OFF Remote Administration.
      2. Run a thorough Nessus scan against it.
      3. Pray

      FWIW, having run Nessus against two FVS318 systems, I have yet to find an open port that I didn't specifically open.

      The FVS318 has been on the market for several years. I have been unable to locate a security notice or vulnerbility report on this device that addresses a problem such as this (well, other than turning remote admin on and NOT changing your password). This isn't to say that there isn't one.

      But, you can be damn sure that I'll run the scans again and checking more frequently for known vulnerabilities and exploits. I'll be making a new tinfoil helmet as well.

    3. Re:FVS318 by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      FWIW, having run Nessus against two FVS318 systems, I have yet to find an open port that I didn't specifically open.

      You do realize that this *only* picks up TCP listening ports (probably not what they'd use), and *only* if the device manufacturer chooses to respond in such a way that lets you know that there's something listening there (also extremely unlikely)?

      There is no way you can avoid router vulnerabilities, if the router manufacturer chooses to be an ass.

      I use a Linux box to do my ADSL routing. I have an HTB tree that does matching on a list of authorized MACs on the network to balance bandwidth fairly between users on the network. Within that HTB (after breaking down bandwidth between all hosts asking for it), I have a three-level queue scheme (with TOS=Minimize Delay, everything else, and then TOS=Maximize Bandwidth). This lets me use SSH with no added latency while web browsing, and web browse with no added latency while still leaving BitTorrent/mldonkey running 24/7.

      Anyone that uses an asymmetric connection like cable or DSL and doesn't have a setup like this doesn't know what they're missing out on. It's fantastic.

    4. Re:FVS318 by Ronin+Developer · · Score: 1

      I have nessus configured to use nmap. It is *supposed* to be doing UDP as well as FIN/SYN scans and such. I get no hits if I turn off remote administration.

      However, I can see your point that they could, theoretically, have the device programmed to respond after receiving a certain sequence of packet with certain flags set. Without disassemblying the firmware, that would be a pretty tough thing to ferret out.

      RD

    5. Re:FVS318 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have nessus configured to use nmap. It is *supposed* to be doing UDP as well as FIN/SYN scans and such. I get no hits if I turn off remote administration.

      UDP scans are performed by sending a packet to a host and seeing whether an error response is returned (as it's somewhat common for UDP stacks to return an ICMP unreachable response if there is nothing listening on that UDP port). However, it's not universal behavior. Furthermore, if your broadband router has a designated DMZ host (common), it *can't* respond to anything other than the "magic sequence" (from the outside, at least), since it will be forwarding other sequences to the host.

      Since there's no reason for the router manufacturer to advertise that they are running a UDP-based backdoor and they (obviously) can choose their UDP behavior, it's very unlikely that they'd choose to respond differently on a "backdoor" port.

      I remember reading about at least one network device (some sort of Cisco or 3com router, IIRC) that did exactly this.

      Without disassemblying the firmware, that would be a pretty tough thing to ferret out.

      Also, keep it mind that it could be difficult to get a full copy of the firmware for your device.

  122. Re:BULLSHIT by simcop2387 · · Score: 1

    i know this is a troll but i can't resist.

    so the problem is that because they use linux that they leave plain text passwords in the firmware? along with that that people can find the backdoors easily meaning that its not just the 1337 hax0rs who know about it, which means that you as a consumer can stay safe about it by researching the products you buy?

  123. Foucault’s Pendulum by spoonyfork · · Score: 2, Funny
    > Do you have the password?
    > no
    Welcome to Abulafia!
    --
    Speak truth to power.
  124. 40136 RingBack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Seems to me that 41036, along with 41091 and a few othewr 5 digit strings beginning with 41 were once relegated to local loop testing. IIRC dialing 40136 then hanging up, would give you a natural ring, just like a real incomming phone call. 40191 would give short and long rings. This was many years ago in the early 70' and in a Canadian area code.

    Can anyone else confirm my rememberances?

  125. Re:Nice fix.HEY! Don't knock it!! Its stable by lcsjk · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Don't talk bad about Win-95. I have an old machine with a Hayes 56k external. The computer runs Win95 loaded from about 12 floppy disks and has never been patched. I don't try to load the latest software or do any updates/upgrades except the virus and firewall.
    It never, never, never crashes or has a problem of any kind. (Well, it will crash if I run Netscape and ACDSee and Photoshop at the same time - so I don't.) I use it for all my "emergency" needs when my new fast gee whizz tiger will not run a program I need.
    I often wonder what MS could have done if they had fixed the few problems in W-95 had instead of making everyone pay more and more for upgraded bloatware>

  126. Time for Theo's Fix? by quarkscat · · Score: 1

    I wonder if the SBC Netgear uses has a JTAG
    port. The CPU and memory available on the
    premium version of the product has (IMO)
    enough capabilities for an embedded install
    of OpenBSD (preferably Ver. 3.4 or 3.5).

    Anyone know of any efforts along this line?

  127. Now THAT'S funny! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "If the EULA does get in the way then
    I think it's time the government steped in to protect the consumer and started making companies liable for acts as stupid as this."

    Let's see...

    if the EULA (which was enacted by the government to protect big businesses) gets in the way (of punishing big businesses) then the government (which wanted to protect big businesses) should take action ...

    bwaahahahaha

  128. Allied Telesyn is the same way by jdew · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I recently bought several 24 port switches off of ebay. There was no way to reset the password, but calling up tech support, and providing a small amount of proof that I did in fact buy these switches, they provided me with the backdoor username/password.

    It's documented on their website that they do have a backdoor password, and what you need to do to get it. For me, it took a single email (ebay end of auction), and a 5 minute phone call to get the backdoor.

    This would be fine, if the backdoor only worked on the serial console, but nope.. Works fine with the web interface too :(

  129. Re:21241036 - For Backdoor Network Access, Call Je by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its actually the phone number of the guy who disclosed this backdoor!!!

  130. Re:Nice fix.HEY! Don't knock it!! Its stable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's not talking bad about Win95, he's ridiculing Win ME, which arguably was one of the worst "upgrades" in OS history - so "fixing Win95 with WinME" actually means making the system more unstable and bloated.

    Posting this AC because I'm ashamed of publicly admitting that I actually paid for WinME and even used it for a few months...

  131. Re:Anyone seen this in the GPL listings of the cod by photon317 · · Score: 1


    I think the "backdoor" is just a user/pass entry in some config file (like a .htaccess-like file), or at least that would be my guess, and wouldn't involved any source code changes. I don't own one, so no real idea.

    --
    11*43+456^2
  132. ACHTUNG! by Tackhead · · Score: 0, Troll
    > > the Ger? to the H?ler zur?zubringen and the purchase price zur?zufordern
    >
    > But if they H?ler zur?zubringen , and the purchase price zur?zufordern... we are DOOMED!

    ACHTUNG! ALLES SLASHENTROLLERS!

    Der WLAN-Access-Point WG602 is nicht fur surfen das Internet! Is easy schnappen der springenverk, blowenfus, remotexploiten, und owninatin mit spitzensparken. Der Firmwaren WG602 is night fur geverken by das dumpkopfen Netgear! Relaxen H?ler zur?zubringen der purchase price zur?zufordern und given das moddenpoints.

  133. In other news by Genevish · · Score: 3, Funny

    In a related story, Netgear has announced the formation of a new security division, formed with ex-Microsoft employees...

  134. IETF security standard for routers by tmacd · · Score: 1
    I am thinking that IEEE or ANSI or whoever should adopt a standard for baseline security for routers.

    There is an existing IETF internet draft on this very subject. Located here.

    (This would probably violate 2.12.9, "No default passwords").
  135. Wardriving by thygrrr · · Score: 1

    A friend of mine is mapping the surrounding cities for WLAN access ports... though not merely "open" WLANs, but open routers. T-Online/Telekom, the monopolist here in Germany, gives out their routers in a plug&play fashion with a default 'password' of 0000 (no username, nothing) in tradition of the electronic phone devices they were selling since the 1970s, since when the default pass code was always 0000. All you need to do is log into these Access points with a webbrowser using (running on port 80, even, address 192.168.1.1 IIRC), and you can retrieve all the info necessary to hijack the person's internet account. As many people have a volume based billing model for their DSL over here, you can cause a lot of damage this way, and never be found. The routers have an annoying (though somewhat sensible) Anti-Theft feature - they won't dial in automatically if they are stolen (i.e. are disconnected from their power supplies), meaning you have to reset them to factory defaults if you don't know the code. Fortunately, their WLAN routers, unlike many older devices, do accept alphanumeric passwords nowadays.

  136. Re:BULLSHIT by homer_ca · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's more than just the mere fact of the backdoor. It's the amateur way they coded the backdoor. They found the strings in plaintext after gunzipping the image file. And to further insult our intelligence, they changed the password and left it coded the same way thinking we're too dumb to find the new one. There's no obfuscation at all except for the gzipping. Linux and open source make no difference here. You can at least give some credit to a well hidden backdoor. What's disturbing is their naive, amateur approach to security.

  137. Bad Idea by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    these are consumer grade devices. If you want those kind of garanuntees, don't buy consumer grade devices. I'm sure cisco will be happy to sell you a router for $100,000 with all kinds of garuantees. Personally, I'll take th $60 netgear and live with the occasional security flaw (and I won't run wireless, It's just not that hard to string ethernet cables, but I digress).

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Bad Idea by gfxguy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But the point isn't that it had security flaws (a lot of things do), it's that they proactively put it there.

      It's not some logic flaw someone found, like a buffer overflow (which no one would blame them for), it's something extra they put into their product specifically making it insecure.

      If a car company finds a flaw in it's airbag system, they replace the airbags and no one blames them - they fixed the problem they saw. If they specifically used flawed airbags, it's entirely different matter. I know we are not talking life and death, but it's a similar principle - only it could result in financial loss instead of physical. People take the risk with airbags, but they should be secure in the knowledge that, while they may still die or be seriously injured in an accident, that the airbag should help. People who buy even a cheap router should be secure in the knowledge that, while they may still be broken into, there are adequate protections.

      In this case, it's not merely negligence on netgear's part, they proactively eliminated any security their products may have offered.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    2. Re:Bad Idea by Aumaden · · Score: 4, Funny
      In this case it's more like:

      "Oh, the white airbags don't work? Here, let me paint it blue."

    3. Re:Bad Idea by Bin · · Score: 1

      There is no excuse for writting code with buffer overflows in. None. You just need to think a little while coding.

      On to the thing about cars, anyone else remember "unsafe at any speed"? Most companies will do what ever they think they can get away with. If they think they can spend nothing and deal with the bad press, etc; they will.

      --
      Or words to that effect ...
    4. Re:Bad Idea by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

      no i think in this case it's more like they slashed the airbags with a little knife hole in case a mechanic had to inspect the inside sometime in the future...

  138. First rule to Password? by damunzy · · Score: 0

    The first rule to Password is there is no Password! Okay, lame Fight Club reference.

  139. Two words: "gross negligence" by Animats · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Someday, somebody from Netgear is going to have to explain that to a judge and jury. And it's not going to go over well. Once might be considered ordinary negligence. But the second time moves it into the "gross negligence" category: "an act or omission in reckless disregard of the consequences affecting the life or property of another."

  140. Re:anon to not karma whore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Um, you can't whoremonger karma when you're anonymous.

    Ah, what the hell... In Soviet Russia, whore's karma you! Yeah, that's even funnier than a karma whore cluster. And I for one welcome our new anonymous karma whoring overlords!

  141. Wonder what DC has to say... by Dave21212 · · Score: 2, Funny


    I wonder what DC Comics (and the other owners?) have to say about NetGear using their copyrighted character in a commercial product ?

    --
    "Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech."--Benjamin Franklin
  142. That's the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Congratulations on the lobotomy!

  143. Why isn't this ilegal. by Holi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I would think under current laws that installing an undisclosed backdoor onto someone elses property would be akin to using a trojan to allow access to anothers system. Just becaujse they sell the system does not give them the right to access to it after it is sold. I can see no beneficial reason for this as most consumer routers have a hardware reset that reloads the factory defaults.

    --
    Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
  144. Linus's Law by Rhodnius · · Score: 1

    "Given enough eyes, all obscurity is shallow" ?

  145. Where is the outrage? by gad_zuki! · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Heck, where is the story? I've only seen this at slashdot and the few media articles it links to.

    I mean, I can turn on my nightly news and hear about "getting ripped off at the dry cleaners? Let our investigative unit show you how!" but when your personal home network with all your work, personal stuff, family photos, etc are now open to the world because of some backdoor its like its no big deal.

    It seems like until someone writes a worm to really screw these people over, no one is going to care. And I'm sure lots of people are testing worms as we speak.

    The larger issue here is the complete disregard for security. A backdoor should never be installed. The firmware reset is more than enough to get back to the default settings. So what if you lose your "settings." That's the price of losing your password info or buying a shoddy product.

    I can't believe my ears when i hear about backdoors, especially from companies like Cisco. What are we telling the industry, that we'll roll over for whatever they do? Are we telling the government that their next USA PATRIOT act might as well have mandatory Ashcroftian backdoors because corporate america is apathetic to security?

    Its mind-boggling. I hope a Netgear gets equated with untrustworthiness and falls from their market position.

    1. Re:Where is the outrage? by cgenman · · Score: 1

      I mean, I can turn on my nightly news and hear about "getting ripped off at the dry cleaners? Let our investigative unit show you how!" but when your personal home network with all your work, personal stuff, family photos, etc are now open to the world because of some backdoor its like its no big deal.

      Do you have any idea how easy it is to pick your front door lock? I don't mean the few seconds it would take a skilled tradesman with years of experience, but how long it takes the average high-school student to learn to pick a lock? In a few short weeks anyone can learn to competently pick a lock with nothing more than a bent screwdriver and a coat hanger. Did you know that they sell skeleton keys for that U-lock on your two thousand dollar bicycle for 400 dollars?

      Consumer-grade security is a joke. It's the plastic lock on the front of your computer case. Your house, your car, your stuff could be stolen on a whim, and isn't pretty much because there aren't a lot of people who want to do that kind of thing.

      Not to pick on the parent specifically, but people have a surprisingly large amount of faith in what are essentially symbolic deterrent systems. Heck, all of the doors in my apartment complex have the pins on the outside, yet nobody is the wiser. The windows all latch and lock, but the glass is held into the pane by putty. The building I work in requires people to sign in and out after a certain hour, but don't check any identifications. It's the illusion of security that provides deterrent security against the illusion of the crime wave that the world isn't under. And in most cases the illusion is sufficient.

      The whole thing breaks down with the internet, sadly. The one person in my neighborhood who is planning to steal from everyone might go through three of us, get caught, and go to jail, shoring up our neighborhood. The interconnectedness of computer systems ensures that even if an attacker gets caught, another attacker can take his or her place immediately, if not concurrently. But take away that, and what do you have? A superficial degree of security, that will deterr everyone but those few with the secret knowledge. That's not news.

  146. Re:21241036 - For Backdoor Network Access, Call Je by shfted! · · Score: 1

    It's a shame this number isn't prime, unlike Jenny's.

    --
    He who laughs last is stuck in a time dilation bubble.
  147. DC Comics to Sue Net Gear Users... by Prototerm · · Score: 1

    ...for copyright violation. Lois Lane is planning to sue because the password is her phone number.

    --
    "My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." --Senator Carl Schurz (1872)
  148. DCMA Violation by charliefrog77 · · Score: 1

    Congratulations, you just violated the DCMA by posting a circumvention to the security of the device in question to /. - there's a special place in the federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison just for you!

  149. Re:21241036 - For Backdoor Network Access, Call Je by Kazymyr · · Score: 1

    Well 21241036 is _almost_ my phone number here in the US. Whom do I sue?

    --
    I hadn't known there were so many idiots in the world until I started using the Internet -Stanislaw Lem
  150. How about a patch for Netgear's reputation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    As flamebait as it may sound, it's worth mentioning that Netgear DID recently begin outsourcing to support & software development to India. This "patch" seemed like a particularly Indian way of solving the problem, so, I looked into it..sure enough. Go Google it for yourself.

  151. Re:21241036 - For Backdoor Network Access, Call Je by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jenny's is really 876-5309 ;p

  152. We need a new Windows worm... by Dimensio · · Score: 1

    One that exploits a fairly recently-discovered hole. One that first attempts to connect to insecure machines, but if it fails to connect to a machine, it then attempts to use the known Netgear backdoor as a passthrough method.

    The fallout from that would be absolutely delicious.

  153. Current firmware on Netgear site "fixes" this one by Thanster · · Score: 1

    Just checked my router:
    1.715 fixes the superman (what is it now??)
    1.714 appears to have changed super >superman (I can confirm the superman account worked :(
    1.5?? had the "super" account vulnerability. again I did confirm that this firmware had this backdoor.

    Netgear have now removed the 1.714/1.5?? firmwares from the site.

    I only hope that they have actually fixed this!!

  154. This isn't a back door. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a front door. With the key in the knob. And a sign that reads, "Yes, we're OPEN".

  155. How did they change the password? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Netgear has a way to change the password on this backdoor, wouldn't the best fix be to let the owners of this box know how to do this, so that the owners can set their own individual passwords?

  156. Netgear sucks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I sent them a support inquiry asking if the problem was also present in their MR814 router. Here's part of their reply:

    "The problem that the WG602 has, was not meant as a venerability."

    I assume the individual meant "vulnerability". That's mighty find. But why would I care what the original intent was? That they even think they are right in creating such a backdoor is ridiculous.

    Well, what can you expect from the guys that pointed all their routers' NTP clients to the Univ. of Wisconsin? And they still try to hide their stupidity labeling the firmware fix as "NTP improvements". Give me a break!

    Enough said. Time to go buy Wi-Fi from someone else.

  157. Ode to WG602v1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "If I let someone hack your box will my login still be superman?

    If I let them in my backdoor will I still be supporting your LAN?"
    - Almost a song. (I didn't say a good one)

  158. Not the first boner your mom has pulled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    and it was good.

  159. Airbags by PedanticSpellingTrol · · Score: 1

    Takata/Highland industries used to make the entire airbag supply for the north american market (and a few european manufacturers) here in Cheraw, SC. Now the plant's in the process of shutting down and moving to Mexico. My point is, they're already blue, IIRC from my school field trip last year.

  160. I go to the University of Wisc @ Madison.. by herrvinny · · Score: 1

    I go to Madison (Engineering major), and I read in the school newspapers last school year (2003-2004) that Netgear is giving something like $50,000 dollars to the DoIT (Department of Information Technology) folks. (DoIT handles the school network, public computers, labs, and so on). So that's pretty much cleared up. Of course, the school newspapers didn't mention that Netgear had flooded the U's time server, but made it seem that because this U rocked so much, they decided to give the money.....

  161. Re:21241036 - For Backdoor Network Access, Call Je by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, considering that last number was the phone for the OEM company...

    It's probably a phone number in Taipei. Those start with 2 and have 8 digits. Unfortunately I don't really want to call to find out...

    If anybody is bored enough: call 886-2-2124-1036 and see who answers. Speaking Mandarin might be an advantage in this case.

  162. Hm by David_Bloom · · Score: 3, Interesting
    If you owned one of these routers, could you figure out where those strings are then just type in random letters of gobbleygook that are the same lengths, and use it on your own router (not distribute it, because then you'd be giving the pass away :))?

    Maybe somebody could make a program where:

    1. User opens program
    2. User points program to firmware file
    3. Program opens firmware file and replaces the hardcoded passwords with gobbleygook that is different each time the program is run
    4. Program writes new firmware to disk
    5. User reflashes router with firmware patched by program
    This seems like a good potential short-term solution to me...
    --

    Karma: Excellent (fuck, even in the future moderation doesn't work!)
    1. Re:Hm by David_Bloom · · Score: 1
      This could even be done server-side.

      Netgear could make a download page with a script that gives each user a different firmware with different gobbleygook.

      --

      Karma: Excellent (fuck, even in the future moderation doesn't work!)
  163. 21241036? by raehl · · Score: 1

    That's the combination on my luggage!

  164. Former Netgear fan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to purchase and recommend Netgear products.

    If this story is true about how they handled the backdoor issue (by replacing it with another backdoor) then I will never buy or recommend their products again.

  165. Re:BULLSHIT by complete+loony · · Score: 1

    Yeah, they didn't even use rot13.

    --
    09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
  166. Wonko the Sane lives by Feanturi · · Score: 1

    This article is my 'box of toothpicks'. I must now build a house inside-out so as to enclose the World in the asylum that it belongs in.

  167. This is like... by n0dez · · Score: 1

    ...selling wireless routers with encryption turned off by default and DHCP turned on by default.

    1. Re:This is like... by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

      Oh boy. It's funny 'cos it's true...

      --
      Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
  168. Re:Anyone seen this in the GPL listings of the cod by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    Not necessarily.

    If their code isn't linked to GPL code (and just running on the same box), they can use code of whatever license they like.

    I agree that router manufacturers have a black history here *cough* Linksys *cough* of swiping code from Linux and then ignoring license terms.

  169. Keyring? by David+M.+Andersen · · Score: 1

    Sounds like you are talking about something like Keyring. One password lets you decrypt a bunch of other passwords stored on the device.

    I guess you could say they are bound in darkness too because they are encrypted and useless without the main password, which "finds" them all.

  170. Grumpy old man (offtopic) by cgenman · · Score: 3, Funny

    In my day, the grease-on ben-tra ran like grease on a pan - that had been burned in place and left there for weeks. Our grease-on ben-tra had a zero to sixty time of sixty seconds, and couldn't steer without rattling like the bones of Buddy Holly. Fuel efficiency? That thing drank like an ex army sergent. And it broke down more often than Tammy Fae. Often times we would be driving it to the shop, and it would break down again on the way. You'd hook it up to the tow truck because of a broken front wheel and the rear axle would crack. Load it on the back, and the bumper would fall off. That thing wasn't a deathtrap: deathtraps have moving parts.

    Hope you like it. Have fun with your car!

    (note: it was an '86. I've heard they have gotten better.)

  171. Draytek 2600G by quinkin · · Score: 1
    I bought a Draytek 2600G - 54Mbps wireless, hardware accelerated 3DES PPTP/IPSEC VPN client/server/passthru (with lots of connections, not the usual conditions that you can only have 2 unless you buy the next model up), USB print server, rate limiting of switch ports, force vpn over wlan, and a quite interactive firmware development process.

    It seems the regional offices are less than helpful in some countries, but the australian site is exemplary.

    Anyone had any bad experiences with them?

    Q. YMMV

    --
    Insert Signature Here
  172. No, maybe they're Netgear Elves by waspleg · · Score: 1

    speak "friend" and enter

    (one password for everyone)

  173. Backdoor can be disabled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Patch the appropriate part of the code, and change the userid to a sequence of carriage return/linefeeds. ?

  174. Dear Stupid... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's obvious to all but the most brain-dead that the GP is familiar with the song, and has changed the lyrics to fit the "in Soviet Russia" paradigm.

    1. Re:Dear Stupid... by TYC · · Score: 1
      It's obvious to all but the most brain-dead that the GP is familiar with the song, and has changed the lyrics to fit the "in Soviet Russia" paradigm.

      Thanks, second AC.

      As a matter of fact, I still have the first dozen or so Rush albums on original vinyl, since replaced with CDs. I think I have more than a passing familiarity with "Tom Sawyer".

  175. ID-10-T Error by Netgear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bet they just lost all their customers. At least the smart ones.

  176. Re: Adom by eggsome · · Score: 1

    I don't get your sig, isen't the "/" symbol either a door or an arrow? So if it's a door then there is no wall either side of it...

    --
    If they made a movie of your life, would anybody buy a ticket?
  177. Great by Pan+T.+Hose · · Score: 1

    In this case it's more like:

    "Oh, the white airbags don't work? Here, let me paint it blue."

    Great, that's exactly what I need just before my death: a blue screen of death! On the other hand, I always suspected that my last words would be "Damn you, Bill Gates!"

    --
    Sincerely,
    Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
    "Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
  178. better analogy. by gfxguy · · Score: 1

    Ok, bad analogy - I thought of a better one.

    If you buy a "consumer" level safe as a place to store your valuables, the safe company will, in most cases, not reimburse you for the items stolen from it. What you are buying is a reasonably secure place to store your valuables. You can be reasonably sure that, while it is possible for someone else to open the safe, it will be very difficult.

    Then you find out that your model of safe has a backdoor combination. Now, it seems you would argue that, because the company didn't advertise it didn't have a "super" combination, they haven't really done anything that bad. Besides, the main purpose of a safe is to store things - and it can still be used for that purpose, right? And only someone who is fully aware of the super combination, AND aware that you have a safe AND is a criminal at heart would even care.

    I say there should be a reasonable assumption of security, and if they can't fix the lock, they should replace the entire safe. It doesn't matter if I've been harmed due to the product's flaw, it matters that I spent money on a product that was supposed to keep me reasonable secure.

    While many people don't put security as their first priority in buying a router, the principle is the same - those people with the "combination" can use your netword. You should be reasonably certain that there are safeguards. You understand that encryption can be broken, that people might still be able to "break into" your network, but you have made a reasonable effort to prevent that.

    I don't think there are any wireless networking products, especially routers, that don't advertise they are secure, or offer a reasonable assumption of security. I don't see how you can call a recall "wildly disproportionate" when it is, in fact, exactly proportionate. So maybe "buy back" is not really that appropriate, but they should replace every single defective unit - and if they don't have a satisfactory product, then they *should* buy them back and allow the consumers to choose another one.

    --
    Stupid sexy Flanders.