> made by an equally obscure manufacturer, YiQingTeng Electronics, in Shenzhen, China.
Is this what is meant by "Shenzhen Speed"? Dump all safeguards and get any piece of crap out the door as soon as possible? This comment isn't directed specifically at Shenzhen, as other parts of the world do the same thing and call it "Move fast and break things."
Dropping engineering standards may increase short term profits, but it erodes people's trust in the world around them when everything "sort of works".
There's an argument that this low level continuous corrosion does more long-term damage than obvious safety flaws that are serious enough to prompt corrective action.
Until the Chinese government penalizes these Chinese companies for these insecure practices, they'll continue to be sold as is. China doesn't need to care about Chinese made products sold for export apparently.
Why single out the Chinese government? No government anywhere cares about defective software. "Engineering" is certainly not the correct term to apply to this industry.
Yeah. I subscribe to a mailing list from a data security company that sends me a summary of breaches, daily. I know it is in their interest to keep me worried. But they aren’t making these stories up.
That’s typically how you show that something is vulnerable before it becomes a real problem.
I mean, criticize the headline if you want, but this is pretty standard reporting for this kind of thing. Recent stories on vulnerabilities in networked car systems were handled using the same approach. (It finally got attention, too, even though security researchers had been pointing out the same issues for years.)
> made by an equally obscure manufacturer, YiQingTeng Electronics, in Shenzhen, China.
Is this what is meant by "Shenzhen Speed"? Dump all safeguards and get any piece of crap out the door as soon as possible? This comment isn't directed specifically at Shenzhen, as other parts of the world do the same thing and call it "Move fast and break things."
Dropping engineering standards may increase short term profits, but it erodes people's trust in the world around them when everything "sort of works".
There's an argument that this low level continuous corrosion does more long-term damage than obvious safety flaws that are serious enough to prompt corrective action.
Until the Chinese government penalizes these Chinese companies for these insecure practices, they'll continue to be sold as is. China doesn't need to care about Chinese made products sold for export apparently.
Why single out the Chinese government? No government anywhere cares about defective software. "Engineering" is certainly not the correct term to apply to this industry.
[1] Yahoo lost all of their 3 billion account credentials https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/732712/0000732712170...
[2] Equifax lost PII of 150 million Americans, including their SSNs https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/refunds/equifax-data-breach-...
[3] AT&T loses SSNs of 73 million customers https://about.att.com/story/2024/addressing-data-set-release...
[4] AT&T loses phone call/texting metadata of 110 million customers https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/732717/0000732717240...
[5] Change Healthcare loses medical records of 200 million Americans https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/special-topics/c...
To someone not drinking your nationalist kool-aid, it looks rather preposterous to make this about the Chinese bogeyman.
Yeah. I subscribe to a mailing list from a data security company that sends me a summary of breaches, daily. I know it is in their interest to keep me worried. But they aren’t making these stories up.
Meanwhile in China…https://www.sixthtone.com/news/1017854
It's 10 PM. Do you know where your children are? We do.
https://archive.is/xNU3i
Ingenious and sad.
the reporter was "hacked" in cooperation with the hacker in order to write the article
"Reporter commissions a (successful) penetration test (of cheap Chinese hardware)" isn't quite as catchy I guess
Journalists have no shame when it comes to making clickbait headlines. Feel like an idiot for falling for it.
That’s typically how you show that something is vulnerable before it becomes a real problem.
I mean, criticize the headline if you want, but this is pretty standard reporting for this kind of thing. Recent stories on vulnerabilities in networked car systems were handled using the same approach. (It finally got attention, too, even though security researchers had been pointing out the same issues for years.)