The companies BUILD IN backdoors so that they can steal your data.
But because the backdoor is built in, they have to constantly monitor and update the security around it so that “bad guys” (they don’t think they are the bad guys) don’t get in.
They only do security updates to prevent liability iirc.
The whole thing stinks.
Note: I’m not a software developer just an outraged bystander with tech hobbies and techy friends, it’s possible this isn’t true.
I have been with a few companies as an engineer, and can at least confirm that you are right from my experience. Nobody really needs a backdoor to get massive amounts of data. The ToS for most software makes it so they can already do whatever they want with it. It’s pretty easy to get a lot of data just by having people use their services normally.
No need for backdoors when the front door is perfectly legal. The need to monitor for bad actors is still correct, though; mostly because they skimp on development costs and penetration testing. Like they say, “never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.” Or in this case, slashing budgets.
What would the “front door” even be in this case? What comes to my mind is the corresponding app on your phone, but that doesn’t really make sense in this context.
In this case, the “front door” would just be not hiding it. Normal, un-hidden APIs. A back door is usually something that the developer includes without informing the user, but they don’t need to be surreptitious; there’s no legal reason to pretend that they’re not collecting the data, and unless you’ve built your brand on privacy and security, there’s no business reason to do so either in the current cultural climate.
And given that the appliance needs to communicate with the app on your phone while you’re not home in the first place, there probably isn’t even a separate tracking API vs. data just being harvested as part of normal operations. So “back door” doesn’t really fit. “Broken by design” or “spyware” would be more apt, I think.
Still, I’m really not a fan of calling any spying/data harvesting a “front door” – IIRC, the term was coined by an FBI head pushing for back doors in our phones so the FBI could scan our messages. But he called it a “front door” as a way to dodge the reasons why building back doors in our security software is a terrible idea.
It’s just another step in the terrible trend of “let’s pretend that this horrible idea is ok if we just rename it” :(
The companies BUILD IN backdoors so that they can steal your data.
But because the backdoor is built in, they have to constantly monitor and update the security around it so that “bad guys” (they don’t think they are the bad guys) don’t get in.
They only do security updates to prevent liability iirc.
The whole thing stinks.
Note: I’m not a software developer just an outraged bystander with tech hobbies and techy friends, it’s possible this isn’t true.
It’s difficult to monetise data if you source it illegally (except in China maybe). Nobody reads the ToS anyway so it’s not like you need a backdoor.
I have been with a few companies as an engineer, and can at least confirm that you are right from my experience. Nobody really needs a backdoor to get massive amounts of data. The ToS for most software makes it so they can already do whatever they want with it. It’s pretty easy to get a lot of data just by having people use their services normally.
No need for backdoors when the front door is perfectly legal. The need to monitor for bad actors is still correct, though; mostly because they skimp on development costs and penetration testing. Like they say, “never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.” Or in this case, slashing budgets.
What would the “front door” even be in this case? What comes to my mind is the corresponding app on your phone, but that doesn’t really make sense in this context.
In this case, the “front door” would just be not hiding it. Normal, un-hidden APIs. A back door is usually something that the developer includes without informing the user, but they don’t need to be surreptitious; there’s no legal reason to pretend that they’re not collecting the data, and unless you’ve built your brand on privacy and security, there’s no business reason to do so either in the current cultural climate.
And given that the appliance needs to communicate with the app on your phone while you’re not home in the first place, there probably isn’t even a separate tracking API vs. data just being harvested as part of normal operations. So “back door” doesn’t really fit. “Broken by design” or “spyware” would be more apt, I think.
Still, I’m really not a fan of calling any spying/data harvesting a “front door” – IIRC, the term was coined by an FBI head pushing for back doors in our phones so the FBI could scan our messages. But he called it a “front door” as a way to dodge the reasons why building back doors in our security software is a terrible idea.
It’s just another step in the terrible trend of “let’s pretend that this horrible idea is ok if we just rename it” :(