GENOCIDUS_REX

GENOCIDUS_REX t1_j8t5dx3 wrote

Ah, not as bad as it first looked, but:

> he points out that companies don’t tend to keep their serial numbers secret. Some stick them right on the box they sell at Best Buy — yes, including Eufy.

I’m good with condemning this massive lapse/lie about “no cloud” devices.

Their original statements, from that link: With secure local storage, your private data never leaves the safety of your home, and is accessible by you alone. False. Facial ID images were uploaded to the Eufy cloud. All recorded footage is encrypted on-device False. Footage was not encrypted. At all. Only the url was encrypted, not the footage. This is also known as a lie

21

GENOCIDUS_REX t1_j8shfo0 wrote

Honest mistakes are minor. This was not honest, or a mistake.

They marketed these devices as specifically “no cloud” security, because of the concerns over Ring and other devices like that.

Then it turns out that it was all made up.

Their devices sent images to the cloud. Unencrypted. AND SAVED IT THERE

Their devices sent video to the cloud. Unencrypted. For anyone with the right url to view.

There were numerous, numerous failings in the security model of this supposedly secure device. They knowingly went to market with it. They avoided owning up to it for 3 months. They continued to sell the defective product during that time frame.

This was not an honest mistake.

74

GENOCIDUS_REX t1_j8sdstd wrote

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/02/ankers-eufy-admits-problems-with-unencrypted-video-access-pledges-overhaul/

Their “no cloud” security cameras would actually allow third party access to unencrypted streams.

It took 3 months for them to come clean about the issue. An absolute disaster from a security perspective - multiple, multiple failings were required for those products to hit market.

67