No, it is an utter fail that ignores technological reality. First, most vulnerable devices will not be visible, because they have already been hacked and the vulnerability will have been closed (but the attacking bot-net owns the device). So they will not find the devices they need to find. And second, relying on ISPs and users to fix this will not accomplish anything.
Since a lot of people here do not get it, I will post it again: 1. The devices vulnerable to this will already be part of a bot-net and the vulnerability will have been closed by the bot-net. Hence they will not even find most problematic devices. 2. They plan to let the ISPs and users fix this. This will accomplish absolutely nothing.
Now, _that_ would be an idea. But this idea is also incompatible with modern ideas of right and wrong and generally is considered a criminal act as you are destroying property that is not yours without permission. We do have some exceptions for emergency conditions, like a fire marshal being allowed to order the evacuation or demolition of a building if it represents a direct danger to human life. In the IoT-field we do not have such laws and human life is not threatened (at least not yet).
Read the original article. That is essentially what they are planning to do and that is (one of) the reasons why I think the whole thing is a really bad idea.
Nonsense. There were designs like that _before_ the RaspberryPi. Their accomplishments on the marketing side have some merit, on the tech-side they damaged the field.
Again, no. You miss the point dramatically. This is not about "high-end" specs. This is about following elementary rules of good electronics design and about making sure the documentation needed to actually learn with this device is available. None of that drives cost up. For example, an SoC with proper Ethernet and several USB ports makes the design _cheaper_ than the mess they made and more reliable. All of that improves learning experience.
And no, I am not a "hater". The one doing "hating" here is you. And you are doing it without a rational or factual basis. I am a competent professional and I am just realistically evaluating these people. Pushing badly designed hardware on a lot of people is morally reprehensible and not compliant with professional ethics. Doing this to students that want to learn is worse. That they spend a lot of time on the design is no excuse. This time would have better spend if they had worked at McDonalds instead and used the money gained to pay for an actual electronics engineer to do the design. The end-result would have been cheaper, easier to use and better for learning.
But this is not an audit. This is a "survey" by scanning and hacking attempt. A pretty bad idea overall. What useful data is supposed to come out of this? IoT devices already hacked (and most vulnerable ones will be) have their vulnerabilities closed to they cannot be taken away from the successful attacker. Hence they do not show up on this "survey". The ones that show up will be the ones that have withstood attack so far and the ones that have been online for only a very short time.
The whole thing is useless and potentially dangerous as it will provide deeply flawed data.
Where in the story do you find anything about "inoculating"? This is a survey and they will leave the devices widely open, possibly more open than before. The "securing" is left to the owners (who usually cannot do it) and these will be notified months later, if at all.
No. It is a demonstration that the designers do not understand what they are doing. Having people "learn" on defective-by-design hardware is about the most stupid idea possible. Especially, when for the same cost you _can_ build good hardware as numerous competitors demonstrate. The people designing the RaspberryCrap just do not have it.
Incidentally, I am not a "Pi Hater". (What's with the cheap rhetoric tricks?) I have two RaspberryPi that work crappily and where I cannot get good documentation. I have a BananaPi and several OrangePies that work just fine.
I do really not understand why such insane ideas get traction at all. Buy one of each of these and hack them in a lab, sure. But hack devices deployed out there by a large and diverse group of people? Pure insanity.
Not really. The need was clearly there at the time it took off. Unfortunately, it was filled by these people with a really badly engineered joke. I mean, no native Ethernet, sound is crap, critical part of the SoC datasheet is unavailable (gpio characteristics, e.g.), they do not know elementary things like naked chips being sensitive to light, don't even get me started about the insane boot-chain, etc. The whole thing screams "amateurs".
Naa, that would require going to a sane SoC instead of the 3rd rate Broadcom crap they are so in love with. I recommend buying an alternative from some people that actually understand electronics.
These people really do not know how to design hardware. I wonder where they messed up this time because they have no clue what they are doing. That hole piece of hardware screams "amateurs".
Slashdot Mirror
Shipping numbers as an argument for _quality_ and suitability for purpose? Seriously?
No, it is an utter fail that ignores technological reality. First, most vulnerable devices will not be visible, because they have already been hacked and the vulnerability will have been closed (but the attacking bot-net owns the device). So they will not find the devices they need to find. And second, relying on ISPs and users to fix this will not accomplish anything.
Since a lot of people here do not get it, I will post it again:
1. The devices vulnerable to this will already be part of a bot-net and the vulnerability will have been closed by the bot-net. Hence they will not even find most problematic devices.
2. They plan to let the ISPs and users fix this. This will accomplish absolutely nothing.
Where in the story do you find anything about "possibly more open than before"?
That is expert knowledge about how "hacking" works. You obviously have none of that.
Now, _that_ would be an idea. But this idea is also incompatible with modern ideas of right and wrong and generally is considered a criminal act as you are destroying property that is not yours without permission. We do have some exceptions for emergency conditions, like a fire marshal being allowed to order the evacuation or demolition of a building if it represents a direct danger to human life. In the IoT-field we do not have such laws and human life is not threatened (at least not yet).
Well, if you are not flat-out lying, I hope there is some nice prison-time in your future. You are part of the problem.
That would be an idiotic idea.
Read the original article. That is essentially what they are planning to do and that is (one of) the reasons why I think the whole thing is a really bad idea.
You seem to have understood absolutely nothing. But what can you expect from an AC?
Nonsense. There were designs like that _before_ the RaspberryPi. Their accomplishments on the marketing side have some merit, on the tech-side they damaged the field.
Bullshit. Your mindless fanboi stance blinds you to reality.
You answer is still stupid. Like you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.
Indeed. They hit the right time by accident. That is their only real accomplishment.
Again, no. You miss the point dramatically. This is not about "high-end" specs. This is about following elementary rules of good electronics design and about making sure the documentation needed to actually learn with this device is available. None of that drives cost up. For example, an SoC with proper Ethernet and several USB ports makes the design _cheaper_ than the mess they made and more reliable. All of that improves learning experience.
And no, I am not a "hater". The one doing "hating" here is you. And you are doing it without a rational or factual basis. I am a competent professional and I am just realistically evaluating these people. Pushing badly designed hardware on a lot of people is morally reprehensible and not compliant with professional ethics. Doing this to students that want to learn is worse. That they spend a lot of time on the design is no excuse. This time would have better spend if they had worked at McDonalds instead and used the money gained to pay for an actual electronics engineer to do the design. The end-result would have been cheaper, easier to use and better for learning.
I agree on the politics.
But this is not an audit. This is a "survey" by scanning and hacking attempt. A pretty bad idea overall. What useful data is supposed to come out of this? IoT devices already hacked (and most vulnerable ones will be) have their vulnerabilities closed to they cannot be taken away from the successful attacker. Hence they do not show up on this "survey". The ones that show up will be the ones that have withstood attack so far and the ones that have been online for only a very short time.
The whole thing is useless and potentially dangerous as it will provide deeply flawed data.
Where in the story do you find anything about "inoculating"? This is a survey and they will leave the devices widely open, possibly more open than before. The "securing" is left to the owners (who usually cannot do it) and these will be notified months later, if at all.
Somebody else will do it even if they do. So you think adding one more attacker is sane?
Stupid answer is stupid. Have a look at the competition (OragnePi, BananaPi, etc.) which you are obviously not aware of.
No. It is a demonstration that the designers do not understand what they are doing. Having people "learn" on defective-by-design hardware is about the most stupid idea possible. Especially, when for the same cost you _can_ build good hardware as numerous competitors demonstrate. The people designing the RaspberryCrap just do not have it.
Incidentally, I am not a "Pi Hater". (What's with the cheap rhetoric tricks?) I have two RaspberryPi that work crappily and where I cannot get good documentation. I have a BananaPi and several OrangePies that work just fine.
I do really not understand why such insane ideas get traction at all. Buy one of each of these and hack them in a lab, sure. But hack devices deployed out there by a large and diverse group of people? Pure insanity.
Not really. The need was clearly there at the time it took off. Unfortunately, it was filled by these people with a really badly engineered joke. I mean, no native Ethernet, sound is crap, critical part of the SoC datasheet is unavailable (gpio characteristics, e.g.), they do not know elementary things like naked chips being sensitive to light, don't even get me started about the insane boot-chain, etc. The whole thing screams "amateurs".
Naa, that would require going to a sane SoC instead of the 3rd rate Broadcom crap they are so in love with. I recommend buying an alternative from some people that actually understand electronics.
Obvious troll is obvious.
These people really do not know how to design hardware. I wonder where they messed up this time because they have no clue what they are doing. That hole piece of hardware screams "amateurs".
More people to shoot rioters. Also, the police is local and may have some residual respect for the population. The military does not care.
With the upcoming Fascism, the military will mostly serve to keep the masses under control. They see that clearly and are preparing for that mission.