Slashdot Mirror


Researchers Hack Over a Dozen Home Routers

An anonymous reader writes "Security researchers at Independent Security Evaluators have published a report demonstrating that a slew of home and small office (SOHO) routers are vulnerable to previously undisclosed vulnerabilities. The report asserts that at least thirteen popular routers can be compromised by a remote attacker, and a number of them do not require knowledge of credentials or active management sessions. Some of the routers are not listed as they work with vendors to fix them, but there are 17 vulnerabilities disclosed, with another 21 pending release. An article on CNET includes an interview with some of the researchers."

72 of 109 comments (clear)

  1. Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    An older computer redone with a FreeBSD install makes an excellent router and is extremely secure. I would suggest anyone who is comfortable with a *nix command line use this solution as I've found it to be virtually bulletproof.

    1. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except for power and space. Sorry, but I want something that I can tuck away on the wall or on top of a shelf, and the average older computer isn't very suitable for that.

      Even a mini-ITX build is still using more power than I'd prefer.

    2. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by 00Monkey · · Score: 4, Informative

      pfSense and others like m0n0wall will work on Netgate's ALIX Kits: http://store.netgate.com/ALIX-Kits-C86.aspx

      They're small and actually look like a router.

    3. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by vjlen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This. We build these for clients and run pfSense on them. Low power, no heat, supports a backup WAN connection with it's three ethernet interfaces. And you can add two more with USB Ethernet adapters.

    4. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by Nerdfest · · Score: 1

      No wireless AP though.

    5. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I like these embedded devices because they are low power (save you money on an ongoing basis) and do the job. Many even offer some nice things like switch management (e.g. creating vlans) if you use custom firmware. That said, if you do switch to a custom firmware, chances are good that you are immune to these vulnerabilities.

      These security researchers don't really count on the later though. They advocate requiring these devices to require signed firmware. That means no custom firmwares, so if your manufacturer ever abandons the device, and security vulnerabilities are later found, you really can't do anything about it. I like custom firmware for not only that reason (e.g. it uses software that is generally better tested against threats) but because it ads features that most OEMs require you to pay a LOT extra for.

      I hope none of these vendors take the signed firmware advice, or at least allow you to sign your own. But many here already know how that goes. I think Netgear is the only one that might set itself apart in that regard as they carry certain models that are explicitly advertised to the customer as being able to use your own firmware.

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
    6. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by blackicye · · Score: 2

      OpenWRT. Linux interface, router package and power consumption. Easy.

      of if that is too intimidating, DD-WRT or Tomato.

    7. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 5, Informative

      No he isn't doing that. You'll get the same security benefit of having a roll your own box if you loaded your own custom firmware that was better tested, like say tomato or openwrt (I'm not a fan of dd-wrt myself, but it seems secure enough.)

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
    8. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by sinij · · Score: 1

      Above is technically complex solution (not everyone on /. is up for it, never mind general crowd) when much easier solutions like custom router firmware like Tomato or DD-WRT exist.

    9. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      So add the WRT54GL to it running Tomato, OpenWRT, or DDWRT.

      $50 from NewEgg
      http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=33-124-190

    10. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by Nerdfest · · Score: 1

      Older router, slower processor, G only. Buffalo has some nicer routers with DD-WRT per-installed. Really though, I was just saying that for most people, a wireless access point is their primary concern, not a hardened router.

    11. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 2

      Probem with Pi is that its network throughput is kinda bad. I have a 50mbit pipe, and pi seems to top out at 35. Kind of problematic for XBMC use for me as well in that playing blu-rays results in buffering for me for the high bitrate ones (add nfs/smb overhead and you dip down to 30mbit - some of my blu-rays peak at 39mbit.) Still trying to figure out of the problem is just me (I only got the pi a week ago) or if everybody with high bitrate ripped bd's has this problem. And no, I don't want to transcode them to a lower bitrate.

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
    12. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by D1G1T · · Score: 1

      Just to be clear, ALIX is a PC Engines product sold in the US by Netgate. There are other sources. http://pcengines.ch/alix.htm

    13. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Except for power and space. Sorry, but I want something that I can tuck away on the wall or on top of a shelf, and the average older computer isn't very suitable for that.

      Even a mini-ITX build is still using more power than I'd prefer.

      What about a Raspberry Pi?

      --
      No sig today...
    14. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by blacksmith_tb · · Score: 3, Informative

      www.easytomato.org - nicely polished version for a common (and fairly versatile) modern router, the ASUS RT-N16.

    15. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      The onboard ethernet is actually connected via USB, and a second network port would have to be connected the same way. It's doable, but not really optimal. Fine for those on low-bandwidth connections, but many internet services now would easily overwhelm it. It's only a 100mbit port at best, and the processor might be a limitation before you reach that point.

    16. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      My Atom mini-ITX router was running happily at 14W.

    17. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      That's because the Pi chip doesn't have ethernet at all. Instead the ethernet port is connected via USB internally. It was the only way to meet the low-cost requirement, but comes with a performance cost: USB takes considerable processor time for bulk data transfers.

    18. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 5, Funny

      so you would sacrifice security for convenience? Then, you deserve neither*.

      You're right. He should block all traffic and whitelist every single IP address as he needs to. Actually, he should manually inspect every packet he receives. Actually, he should have all his packets printed at a remote location and FedEx'd to him for examination and re-input.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    19. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by rvw · · Score: 1

      Except for power and space. Sorry, but I want something that I can tuck away on the wall or on top of a shelf, and the average older computer isn't very suitable for that.

      Even a mini-ITX build is still using more power than I'd prefer.

      How about a Raspberry Pi like device with two ethernet ports and FreeBSD on it?

    20. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by isama · · Score: 1

      My Raspberry Pi seems to cap out at 20Mbit on my 50Mbit home connection.

    21. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Using an older computer as a router is a massive waste of power (and space). Get something that's designed specifically for the purpose: a modern router like a typical Linksys unit uses a tiny amount of power and is very small. And the software side isn't a problem: just install DD-WRT on it.

    22. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      .. but the real question is: Can you use it to learn how to do HTML Markup?

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    23. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      I would go Mikrotik before I would try a rasberry pi. For about the same price you get 5 ethernet ports and 802.11n in a low power, tiny package.

    24. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by Cederic · · Score: 1

      I find the default software on my RT-N66U to be pretty solid. It's a fine router too, easy to configure, hasn't even needed rebooting since I bought it.

    25. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      For people who have an old working computer around and a place to set it up, know how to install FreeBSD (and cope with any driver issues, etc.), and how to configure it. That's a very small segment of the population.

      It would be really nice to have the vast majority of the population immune from being hacked into, and that's just not going to happen with FreeBSD installations. Most people are going to buy whatever router they're told, and leave it in whatever configuration it's in when installed (or after going through the step-by-step process in the instructions). Some will ask for advice on a secure router, and FreeBSD isn't the answer for them. If there is none, they'll just join a handy botnet (not by choice), and cause problems for everybody else.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    26. Re:Use a FreeBSD box as your firewall by ChrisMaple · · Score: 2

      That's inadequate; he'd still be vulnerable to a killer joke attack. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Funniest_Joke_in_the_World. Each packet must be divided into four parts to be read by a security team, no person being allowed to read more than one part.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  2. ISP Provided? by GeneralTurgidson · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If your ISP provides you an insecure router and your credit card numbers are subsequently stolen, whose fault is it? Especially when these routers are only configurable via your ISP?

    1. Re:ISP Provided? by JJJJust · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yours for either A. having your credit card information on the network in an unencrypted state, B. transmitting it without making sure the HTTPS lock is present, and/or C. not having adequate deskop security.

      It takes more than just an accessible router to get to sensitive information... if an unauthorized party is able to access that information, 9 times out of 10 it'll be a user's fault.

    2. Re:ISP Provided? by sinij · · Score: 2

      I see where you went wrong. You are trusting the same guys that try to oversell and under-deliver all while trying to legislate away competition to be technically competent and deliver you a secure router. What makes you think this time will be any different?

    3. Re:ISP Provided? by goombah99 · · Score: 1

      Yours for either A. having your credit card information on the network in an unencrypted state, B. transmitting it without making sure the HTTPS lock is present, and/or C. not having adequate deskop security.

      It takes more than just an accessible router to get to sensitive information... if an unauthorized party is able to access that information, 9 times out of 10 it'll be a user's fault.

      Most people use dynamic addressing and delegate the DNS lookup to the router. This means Https or any of the other things you mentioned are useless as security measures.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    4. Re:ISP Provided? by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      It's the fault of the person who stole your information...or at least it should be. Today's over litigious society probably disagrees.

    5. Re:ISP Provided? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Simply falsifying DNS won't do it - you can't impersonate an https site without a cert. Easiest way I see would be to intercept logins to non-https sites, and rely on the user reusing passwords.

    6. Re:ISP Provided? by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      you can't impersonate an https site without a cert.

      Maybe. The recent browser releases have taken a step to improve the situation by remembering if they used https for a host before and doing it by default the next time but its not 100%.

      Consider:
      You type thinkgeek.com in your url bar. You don't specify the protocol because only those of us slashdot readers understand the risks inherent in not doing so bother and your browser decides to use plain http. An important omission was made but no typo. I intercept your clear text 80 traffic and rather than the remote host sending a 302; I send you a 302 and point you at https://thinkgeak.com/ which redirects to a server I control and have a valid certificate for. Your browser issues no warnings. Will you notice if I have done a good job cloning the site? Hell maybe I actually proxy your requests to the real host so you can even order and get your stuff like nothing is wrong, meanwhile I snag your CC and CVC as it goes by with a ciphers I selected.

      https is pretty good but its still possible to do some amount of spoofing under the right conditions.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    7. Re:ISP Provided? by synapse7 · · Score: 1

      It is always our fault, when was the last time you saw an isp take fault for anything.

    8. Re:ISP Provided? by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      In an ideal world software vendors wouldn't put users in a position of choosing between trusting their internet connection and not getting the software. Certification authorities would make damn sure they were issuing certificates to the right entity. Credit card companies would move away from a system where the dominent way of making an online payment is to give the vendor a code that lets them take unlimited money from your account. Users would directly enter the https url or at least carefully check the https url they had been redirected to after entering the http url. Legitimate vendors wouldn't spread their services across multiple domains so it would be easy to tell the difference between the vendor's legitimate site and a scam domain. Websites that were going to use a third party payment gateway would bring users into a secure area of their own site before giving them the url of the payment gateway.

      Sadly we don't live in that world

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    9. Re:ISP Provided? by JJJJust · · Score: 1

      In an ideal world software vendors wouldn't put users in a position of choosing between trusting their internet connection and not getting the software.

      Most of the majors have a system for buying game cards in a physical store. If the user prefers convenience, that's on them.

      Credit card companies would move away from a system where the dominent way of making an online payment is to give the vendor a code that lets them take unlimited money from your account

      Credit card companies used to do this via one-time virtual card numbers. For the most part, the user found it inconvenient and didn't use it.

  3. Somebody alert NASA by servognome · · Score: 2

    They hacked 13 Solar & Heliospheric Observatory routers.

    Yes I did go to the actual article, but got bored after reading the headline.

    --
    D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
  4. This time I'm intrigued... by juventasone · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Comprosing cheap routers is a topic that has been covered on Slashdot many times before. In every previous article, they've required that remote administration be enabled on the router, which is generally never a default setting. This report states, "tested with out-of-the-box configuration settings". Really? Yikes.

  5. Easy to mitigate. by viperidaenz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They're pretty much all CSRF vulnerabilities. Don't save your password to your router or don't use a common router IP address like 192.168.1.1

    1. Re:Easy to mitigate. by animaal · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They're pretty much all CSRF vulnerabilities. Don't save your password to your router or don't use a common router IP address like 192.168.1.1

      I'm scratching my head here - why would an address like 192.168.1.1 be a problem? It's only an internal IP address. An attack from the outside would come through the external IP address. Once they've breached the router, surely it'd be simple to find internal addresses anyway?

      (Really hoping I don't have to re-address my stuff!)

    2. Re:Easy to mitigate. by viperidaenz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because its cross-site-request-forgery.

      If you're logged in to your router and you go to another website that has an image tag with a url of "http://192.168.1.1/admin/enable-remote-login" or submits a form using javascript off to 192.168.1.1 then they've effectively made that request from inside your local network via your browser.

      If there is an exploit that enables remote admin then not only has the attacker now enabled remote admin on your router but they have your external IP address to exploit because you made the request...

      I'm disappointed in the Slashdot moderators for giving this +4 Insightful. It was a good question though.

    3. Re:Easy to mitigate. by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      They're not running code on your browser. They're just making the browser perform a request. You need to know the routers local IP for that to work.
      Browsers block cross-domain code execution, so you can't read any data that comes from another domain via Javascript. All you can do is blindly fire off requests.

    4. Re:Easy to mitigate. by cgimusic · · Score: 1

      How does it not? An external attacker should not have any access to your internal network and hence has to guess the IP address of the router. It is easier for them to make a few attacks against 192.168.1.1 and 192.168.0.1 than for them to try and attack the entire range of IP addresses reserved for internal networks.

    5. Re:Easy to mitigate. by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      I am a moderator who gave him a +1 for that question. It will be undone, of course, because I posted in this thread. It was a good question that I wanted an answer to. Now that it got up to +4, someone answered it. If it was still sitting at Score:1 where it was before I gave it mod points, would anyone have bothered to answer?

      I'm disappointed in the parent poster for dissing the moderation system because it worked as intended.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    6. Re:Easy to mitigate. by alexo · · Score: 1

      I'm disappointed in the parent poster for dissing the moderation system because it worked as intended.

      Perhaps the OP meant that "interesting" would be a better fit than "insightful".
      Reference: http://slashdot.org/faq/metamod.shtml

    7. Re:Easy to mitigate. by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      I answered it because it's a reply to my post. Nothing to do with how many points it got.

  6. Warning: $1 a day for some "older computers" by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's been mentioned, but I have actual metrics (Kill-A-Watt P3) on the electricity used by "old computers"... in my case it was about a buck a day (I'm in So Cal, so YMMV, but I am sure electric rates are going to go up here, since California is going to save the world from global warming [or go broke trying], all by itself, by taxing the bejesus out of anyone with two nickles, You're welcome.)

    BTW - anyone with an old VCR or DVD player you REALLY don't use... about $18 year just to keep it plugged in (flashing 12:00 or not). I tossed 2 units in the Goodwill bin a couple of years ago and haven't missed them.

    --
    This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
  7. Don't forget Buffalo by Zynder · · Score: 3, Informative

    The Buffalo Nx00 series (mine is an N900 I think) also uses DD-WRT and actively advertises it. In basic mode, it is a Buffalo branded implementation but there is a variable to set which puts it in advanced DD-WRT Mode. It was the primary driver in my decision to purchase said router. My knowledge at the time was that Buffalo only did backup solutions & SANs but went out on a limb and bought it anyway. I have never been more happy. Buy one today!

    1. Re:Don't forget Buffalo by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      If I didn't have a Cisco/Linksys E1000 running DD-WRT, I'd definitely be getting a Buffalo just for their support of DD-WRT.

  8. Re:Blaming the victim by epyT-R · · Score: 2, Insightful

    the people responsible are the ones who committed the crimes, not the people who coulda-shoulda-woulda been in positions to prevent it if they had done X more.

  9. DD-WRT by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

    I wonder how DD-WRT stacks up.

    --
    -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    1. Re:DD-WRT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I wonder how DD-WRT stacks up.

      It bothers me that the "Latest stable release" on DD-WRT's website still refers to a version (10020) which is vulnerable to a remote code execution discovered in 2009. You must be running a version marked as "development" to be secure from the bug, which is bad marketing.

  10. pfsense by n3r0.m4dski11z · · Score: 1

    dont fuck around

    --
    -
    1. Re:pfsense by xyourfacekillerx · · Score: 1

      don't mess around, don't fool around, don't look around and don't back down!

      /oblig ninety pound wuss reference. emoviolence that fueled those 18 hour coding sessions in my youth!

  11. Won't help you by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 2

    Using a firewall box behind the router your ISP mandates you use, will not help you against a number of threats. Basically, they take over your router, put a sniffer on it and they can sniff all your internet traffic. The extra firewall may or may not prevent them gaining access to your computers behind the IPV4-NAT your router usually does. That's the only protection an extra firewall might give you. I'm saying might, since slight misconfiguration or access to a hackable service behind the firewall will negate all security that firewall is giving you.

    Advocating FreeBSD, or any other specific solution is not helpful here. There are plenty of other adequate firewall solutions, more or less regardless of the operating system they may be running.

    In practice, it will only help if manufacturers and vendors will be found liable for security flaws in their equipment and will automatically have to pay not just the price of the device and all damages to all customers that have bought it, but also a fine if they are found to be negligent. It's clear that vendors don't take security seriously (all tested devices were hacked) and ISPs aren't either. Home users can't be expected to know their security details up to such a high level so can't really be blamed for trusting their ISP or a leading brand to take care of security adequately. ISPs, vendors and manufacturers are supposed to know and actively secure their devices. Since they don't seem to care, some sort of threat should be put in place to make them take this more seriously.

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
    1. Re:Won't help you by jawtheshark · · Score: 1

      Ehm, that's why you set your router in "bridge" mode and use it as a dumb ADSL modem. Or, if you're like my dad and have real fiber at home, you just plug into the ONT. No more modem needed. Sure, you have to do the PPPoE yourself on firewall/router-machine, but that works just fine. (Fiber with a ONT, usually involves adding a VLAN and the do PPPoE over the VLAN)

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    2. Re:Won't help you by ImprovOmega · · Score: 1

      Basically, they take over your router, put a sniffer on it and they can sniff all your internet traffic.

      I'm sure all of the encrypted SSL traffic between me and 80% of my web browsing will be incredibly useful to these malicious attackers.

    3. Re:Won't help you by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Try that with IP-tv, like Uverse. I have to allow their router to function, but I tell it to passthrough my router on the external address. It usually forgets the configuration every couple of months and I have to reset it, lots of fun.

    4. Re:Won't help you by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Nothing a vpn won't fix

      Oh, your router can't act as a vpn client? Guess you should check out pfsense.

    5. Re:Won't help you by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Of course it can. Why would I need pfsense when I have a cheap efficient dedicated device with gig ethernet and twin 450Mbps wifi links?

    6. Re:Won't help you by jawtheshark · · Score: 1

      Disable the auto-update feature. That's usually what does this.

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
  12. Fault? by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 1

    I don't think there's a single person or legal entity "at fault" here. It's a combination of multiple factors. First of all, your credit card company uses a proven flawed security model. Second of all, you should have been more careful with those numbers yourself, since it's a proven flawed system. Third of all, yes, your ISP can be found negligent for not adequately testing the equipment they provided to you. They can blame it on their manufacturer, but if they haven't tested the equipment they should be found criminally negligent in my opinion. You can't ask home users to know this much about computer security, since it's not their profession in general. However, ISPs are in this for a living and should know better.

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
  13. Confirmed case here by xyourfacekillerx · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My parents' ISP issued router came down with a case of malware. The ISP kept putting them into walled-garden claiming botnet activity, and after months and months of this, I intervened. upon my investigation (which also took months) and thanks to their reluctant but cooperative security team, we determined it was not the only connected device that had the malware, but the router itself. And only because I "hacked" into it at some point and observed the malware in action, and reported my results back to the ISP. I thought my method (though it required some circumvention) was an intentional feature of the router. I didn't realize it was a vulnerability. Not at the time. I mean how do they remotely configure your router while on call or live chat with them? How can they expect me to think I can't do the same thing myself?

  14. Why not? by tick-tock-atona · · Score: 1

    I've got one of these running debian wheezy. It acts as firewall/router/wifi-hotspot/OpenVPN gateway, and even allows me to have a *real* DMZ, unlike most home routers.

  15. the quote from the researcher by nimbius · · Score: 1

    Darren Kitchen: "There's not a consumer demand for security; it's not a feature that will sell it."

    PfSense: "Speak of the devil and he shall appear."

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:the quote from the researcher by Wilf_Brim · · Score: 2

      I disagree. There is a demand for security, at least among some a certain set of consumers. The current problem is that apparently none of the commercially available routers appear to be worth anything when it comes to security. Every time an article like this appears on /. I keep looking for some recommendations as to what to do. And I never find anything. The only recommendation I did find was from Mr. Kitchen, about using an old computer and smoothwall. Well, first, physically that wouldn't work (the cable modem, router, and switch all live up on a small shelf near the patch panel for my house. Yes, I paid $$ to get the place wired). Second, I really doubt my ability to keep a linux box up, operating, and fully patched. Keeping the router's firmware up to date is easy (it checks itself, and will pop up on the admin page when a new firmware is available: some will even flash themselves if you allow it): a unix OS isn't going to be that easy. I really don't understand why some manufacturer doesn't use this as a marketing opportunity. There is a niche here. I'd may more (maybe significantly more) for something that is secure, works well, and meets my needs.

  16. Schhhhht! by mnt · · Score: 1

    Just exploit thousands of them to create new tor exit nodes.

  17. Use Endian firewall and an old desktop computer. by JohnnyConservative · · Score: 1

    Endian firewall is robust and relatively easy for an average technical end user to implement.

  18. Only idiot, moron, democrat, socialist, communist, by JohnnyConservative · · Score: 1

    Only idiot, moron, democrat, socialist, communist, progressive folks use a hackable router or firewall! They really are just that dumb! Look at how they vote!

  19. I will NOT sell my riding mower! by pivot_enabled · · Score: 1

    screw you!

  20. Victim Must Have Active Management Session... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Look at the summary chart in the article.

    With the exception of two Belkin routers, the victim must have an active management session open at the time of attack and the victim must be tricked into clicking a malicious link that leverages the open management session. This renders this "vulnerability" as highly unlikely. Most people do not open management sessions after initial router setup.

    Not surprisingly, this article is full of hyperbole and the likelihood of actual router takeover is minimal to infinitesimally small. Hence, no widespread exploits.