• Evotech@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    How so, it’s clearly a shared account

    I don’t think that’s a wild assumption to make

    • CosmicGiraffe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      20 hours ago

      A shared account doesn’t mean everyone who works there has access to it, or that those who do have access aren’t subject to some type of access control.

      The article basically goes on to say that the existence of this key makes a huge difference to the security/privacy of the product. It argues that using it, someone could access data from the device, or use it to upload arbitrary code to the device for it to run. However, those are both things the user is already trusting the company with. They have to trust that the company has access controls/policies to prevent individual rogue employees doing the things described. It seems unreasonable to say that an SSH key being on the device demonstrates that those controls aren’t in place.

      • Evotech@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 hours ago

        I agree to an extent, the user already uses a cloud service. So they have to trust the provider.

        And as far as a bed goes, I suppose you can’t expect the customer to ssh into it if something goes wrong and you have to fix it.

        Both seems reasonable to me.

        • CosmicGiraffe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Yeah, its not unreasonable that you’d have a remote way to access the device to gather debug data with the customers consent. An SSH key in the firmware is a flexible way to do that, so long as there are good controls in place to ensure that it isn’t misused.