- cross-posted to:
- technology@beehaw.org
- cross-posted to:
- technology@beehaw.org
TP-link is reportedly being investigated over national security concerns linked to vulnerabilities in its very popular routers.
TP-link is reportedly being investigated over national security concerns linked to vulnerabilities in its very popular routers.
It’s a good idea, but there’s going to be firmware at lower levels (roughly the BIOS) that could still be compromised. It’s best to just not buy Chinese hardware designed and manufactured by a Chinese company with no western involvement when you can avoid it.
I’m not sure, but with routers, I think OpenWRT installs/flashes at the firmware level. There could be hardware level vulnerabilities I suppose.
In the case of Lenovo laptops used in Iraq (2004), China had additional hardware chips snooping and sending data back via Ethernet cable.
This didn’t even occur to me when I bought my new router recently. I just went with one of the best-reviewed models that had all the features and speed I needed.
Did you get a TP Link?
Last time I was in the market, they were a top pick.
Out of curiosity, what would happen with older models. Also other devices, like I don’t have a TPlink router but I do have a TPlink Ethernet to power to Ethernet I bought when I lived in an appartment and didn’t want to drill holes in the walls. (Wifi ran from center of house, but outed it to a 110 in the wall and hardwired to a PC into a RAP for work in bedroom at the time.
Sure did. The Archer BE1100 Pro.
An even better way is to leave vulnerable pieces in all parts of the firmware / software stack. E.g. old version of SSH with a known vulnerability or two, old web server, etc. Then just exploit as needed.
The examples you gave are all at the OS level and installing OpenWRT would fix them. The firmware/BIOS level is much more custom and can be susceptible to attacks the OS is completely unaware of (effectively pre-installed rootkits). Hence why I mentioned it may not be enough to install OpenWRT.
You are talking about the boot loader, but even that is pretty standard. There could be hardware exploits in place, sure, but we are mostly talking about a very low margin product and the volume of data that you’d need to retrieve and process to sift out anything useful would be massive and obvious so in general I think this is mostly conspiracy level thinking. Any shenanigans is going to be done in small targeted batches if it’s done at all to try to infiltrate specific targets and reduce risk of some curious researcher or enthusiast accidentally stumbling across it and ruining it.
Bold of you to assume they actually need to make money on these.
They also don’t need to sort through data to be problematic; they just need to be able to be remotely disabled or remotely given the order to start sniffing if they are one of the higher end systems that would be used in major infrastructure (that could process at volume).
Sure a researcher could stumble upon something… But closed source, embedded deep in the hardware, etc the number of researchers working at that level is not all that high AFAIK. The research is also from my understanding very very difficult at that level. It would be borderline equivalent to reverse engineering the Intel remote management engine or something.
Yes of course, you’re right. The point I’m making is that wherever you’re putting in backdoors, instead of backdoors, you can just leave unlatched vulnerabilities. Gives you solid plausible deniability.