• nalinna@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Please correct if inaccurate, but I don’t see in that article where the folks at Espressif refer to it as a backdoor, only the security company. This seems to me as though it is no more vulnerable than any other device which can be compromised by physical access, which is most of devices. The vulnerability really looks to be more in the ability to pivot to other devices remotely after one has been compromised physically, which isn’t ideal, but still doesn’t seem to me to be any less secure than most other devices.

    • azdle@news.idlestate.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      I mean, if it were a backdoor, the one thing you can be sure of is that the people who put it there wouldn’t be calling it a backdoor, ever.

      Though, I think it’s worth pointing out that the while the security company’s blog calls whatever it is a “backdoor”, “backdoor” (nor “puerta” (though, I have no idea if that would be translated literally or to something else)) doesn’t appear in the the slides. So I’m going to lay that one at the marketing people trying to drum it up into something more impressive than it really is.