Meanwhile Synology keeps updating my ageing NAS.
They may not have the best bang for the buck for hardware but their software package is really well put together.
Sounds like D-Link is telling people to buy Synology.
Or just build your own? I have an eight-bay running OMV that I built using one of these cool little mini-ITX towers.
The “issue” I have with this case is the SFX format for the PSU, they are rare and more expensive.
Not sure what you mean…? I bought a random Corsair PSU from bestbuy and it’s working fine.
I’ve never said anything about your PSU not working. I’ve simply commented on the Jonsbo N3 that requires a PSU of SFX form factor. SFX’ PSUs are more expensive and less common than the ATX one, that’s it.
deleted by creator
Why the delete? 😃
Well whaddaya know, you get what you pay for.
That being said, companies should be legally obligated to provide security patches for a minimum number of years.
My synology box is 8 years old now and still getting patches. I would actually buy it again. Good work.
I could be a lot happier with Synology. Honestly. When it’s time to replace mine I’m just going to build one.
Same. I’m just making a Truenas server next year when setting up the new network. It’s probably cheaper anyway.
I have to say I’ve also been enjoying my synology - going on almost 7 years since this thing was released and I get security updates regularly still. Will buy again once this thing dies.
I bought my DS212 in 2012. Still going strong after two drive swaps. And now I feel old.
Alright, I’ll just buy another one… from a brand that isn’t shit.
I’m a little bit torn on this one, we’re talking 10-15 year old devices here. The number of companies that will continue to produce emergency security patches for their hardware so old and having reached EOL four years ago in 2020 are few and far between. Caveat Emptor most definitely, but if you’re someone who likes to keep their tech running forever, you’re going to need to get creative, when the manufacturer eventually stops patching. For this particular instance, I’d recommend placing the unit behind a vpn on the lan.
Yeah, I mean…what IS “end of life” / “end of support” other than not patching newly found issues, after long enough? Not enough info in the article to indicate any kind of bait and switch or annoyingly short support window, and the support window didn’t end recently either. Seems pretty reasonable TBH.
Then again it’s a lot of vulnerable devices, and doesn’t sound like too hard of a fix. But for all I know they’ve dismantled their tooling for testing patches on those devices, etc. Would be nice if they addressed it, but I can’t exactly condemn them for not.
It looks like they just didn’t neutralize/sanitize controllable input data so it should be a pretty easy fix. I think if a security researcher gives you a layup by identifying an easily fixable vulnerability a company should just take it, even if the product is old. If for no other reason than it’s bad marketing when news articles like this come out.
Yeah, I know what you mean, and yep it looked like just input sanitization on a very specific thing. I don’t disagree, headlines being headlines, and even just broad benefit vs. overall level of effort seems pretty positive to me from an outsider’s perspective.
But then again, issuing a firmware update is also an implicit guarantee that no (unrelated) functionality will degrade, which really needs a degree of testing in order to be a responsible business decision. And then on the optics side, I can see there being a benefit to a hard line in the sand regarding EOL, vs getting into the weeds of determining on a case by case basis what merits violating their own policy, and all the implications such granular judgment calls would entail (although they and all others probably must do something similar, to some degree).
Idk, I don’t own much or any of their stuff these days, no real skin in the game, nor do I have any particularly relevant info or opinions on the company. Just rambling lol.
Most honest person in this discussion.
These are storages though. They should last that long. Just by the fact there is still 60,000 in use is enough reason to patch it.
Yet again another reason why I won’t buy proprietary systems like this. Make your own, if you know what a NAS is I’m sure you van handle it.
I van handle everything… Honk Honk.
Lenovo did this when they bought Iomega NAS devices. The final firmware before they ended support added google ads to the web admin interface. So now I have it booting Debian and OpenMediaVault, bye bye Lenovo.
And other reasons why closed-source firmware can go fuck itself.
deleted by creator
Just YSK, vlan is not a security measure. It enumerates Ethernet packages with a number different than zero, and you can see all vlans if the network card decides it. So if some other device on your net is compromised, there is a chance traffic to your vulnerable box can be too. ( it gets a little more complicated with vlan aware switches in the middle. But not impossible)
Edit: BTW I feel you I too have a bit of older hardware thats on their own net where I just hope nothing bad happens til I come around to replacing it…
Laughs in TrueNAS
Laughs in uGreen NAS with TrueNAS.
Welp, looks like I’m changing brands next time I buy a router.
Banana Pi R3 or R64 (OpenWRT). Some DIY assembly required but it will probably last you over a decade.
My favorite part about these is that they are unbrickable. There is no bootloader to permanently corrupt as the firmware that loads the flash chip is in mask memory and the firmware you load from OpenWRT is the bootloader + firmware. So even if the flash chip dies you can use the other flash chip on the board or with soldering skills replace it and re-flash it.
So now more buying D-link anymore
this typo completely changes the sense of your sentence 😅
Oh my… Really… Thanks for pointing it out :) Of course i leave it
The article didn’t specify how old the affected models are, but any time you use an all-in-one device with proprietary software, you take the risk of this happening.
To some extent, you can’t really blame the manufacturers for this, either. They can’t reasonably continue maintaining software for their products for an indefinite period of time. As an extreme example, I wouldn’t expect the old Linksys wifi router I used in 2004 to still be receiving firmware updates.
My NAS hardware is relatively ancient, but it’s regular server hardware running TrueNAS. If TrueNAS suddenly stops getting updates, there’s UnRaid, or just Linux. It really goes to show the advantage of using generic hardware with open software.
you can’t really blame the manufacturers for this, either. They can’t reasonably continue maintaining software for their products for an indefinite period of time.
Shh, anytime I say this about Windows I get people coming out of the woodwork that say Windows 7 should be supported 15 years later.
Don’t you know that it’s entirely unreasonable to expect your users to have hardware that’s a standard feature on any machine made in the last ten years, that can be added to existing systems for around $30 and a free card slot? /s
I don’t think I’ll ever understand the insistence that a TPM module is a bridge too far.
My PC has a tpm, the CPU is simply on the unsupported list.
Because of the sheer amount of e-waste it will generate by force-decommissioning hardware in active usage. Don’t know why that’s so hard to understand.
The only reason that’s any different than any other time Microsoft has released a new OS is that more people own computers now than ever before, improvements in hardware power have slowed significantly, and people are more outspoken online now.
It’s still not reasonable to expect them to support all hardware forever on an aging codebase.
I understand the frustration, but this isn’t some new thing for this new OS in particular.
You’re extrapolating to “forever”. I just want to reduce e-waste by not forcing people to get new computers they don’t want or need yet. Every year of additional service life, more people upgrade hardware for other reasons.
You’re right in saying that these devices are basically ancient, and also right about why you should never use all-in-ones for anything that you would want to last more than a couple of years.
http://support.dlink.com.au/download/download.aspx?product=DNS-320 The age of the devices:
Firmware: 1.00
Hardware: A1
Date: 2010/9/7
First DNS-320 firmware releaseFor those kind of devices, the manufacturer should be required to make it possible to easily load a third-party firmware when they declare a device as obsolete.
I understand it’s not financially viable to support a device beyond a certain threshold, but there’s likely a community behind those that are willing to keep these devices alive for a while longer, with the benefit of reducing the amount of ewaste.
I expect security patches for the tires on my Model T. Ford is still around, so what’s the ploblem?
Just looked it up and the DNS-320 Version 1.00 is from 2010. I get it on the company side thats old and was a given to be out of date. People who own it should take more mitigations to protect against any unwanted connections. Or use something that doesn’t rely on proprietary firmwares like truenas or unraid.
A NAS, a router or Storage server all of the are computer. Just use old computer as nas instead of throwing them away.
“Okay, I found a great NAS made by another company.”
D-Link: “No, wait!”
Doesn’t matter to the D-Link bean counters. Either case is a non-sale to them. Never mind that they tank whatever is left of their already terrible reputation, all they care about is immediate shareholder revenue generation, and spending money maintaining software for older hardware is a loss to them.
Yup, doesn’t surprise me.
I also have a NAS box that’s out of support. Turned off all of the nifty services and firewalled the shit out of it so it won’t be visible outside the LAN even by accident. Will replace it with a FreeBSD box as soon as I get a new hard drive.
