Cisco locks customers out of their own routers, only lets them back in if they agree to being spied upon and monetized
-
BoingBoing[^]:
Owners of Cisco/Linksys home routers got a nasty shock this week, when their devices automatically downloaded a new operating system, which locked out device owners. After the update, the only way to reconfigure your router was to create an account on Cisco's "cloud" service, signing up to a service agreement that gives Cisco the right to spy on your Internet use and sell its findings, and also gives them the right to disconnect you (and lock you out of your router) whenever they feel like it.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
The Register has been informed.
-
BoingBoing[^]:
Owners of Cisco/Linksys home routers got a nasty shock this week, when their devices automatically downloaded a new operating system, which locked out device owners. After the update, the only way to reconfigure your router was to create an account on Cisco's "cloud" service, signing up to a service agreement that gives Cisco the right to spy on your Internet use and sell its findings, and also gives them the right to disconnect you (and lock you out of your router) whenever they feel like it.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
-
BoingBoing[^]:
Owners of Cisco/Linksys home routers got a nasty shock this week, when their devices automatically downloaded a new operating system, which locked out device owners. After the update, the only way to reconfigure your router was to create an account on Cisco's "cloud" service, signing up to a service agreement that gives Cisco the right to spy on your Internet use and sell its findings, and also gives them the right to disconnect you (and lock you out of your router) whenever they feel like it.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
-
I don't think it's cisco that will be disconnecting you. And I'm sure it's automatic data gathering, and who's really residing in that cloud, d-h-s?. Glad I have a vintage linksys 2002 router at home. Thinking about replacing it with a new G37.
You're replacing a router with a G37? I hope you're getting the convertible[^].
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
-
BoingBoing[^]:
Owners of Cisco/Linksys home routers got a nasty shock this week, when their devices automatically downloaded a new operating system, which locked out device owners. After the update, the only way to reconfigure your router was to create an account on Cisco's "cloud" service, signing up to a service agreement that gives Cisco the right to spy on your Internet use and sell its findings, and also gives them the right to disconnect you (and lock you out of your router) whenever they feel like it.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
That just makes me sick.
Bill Gates is a very rich man today... and do you want to know why? The answer is one word: versions. Dave Barry Read more at [BrainyQuote](http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/topics topic_technology.html#yAfSEbrfumitrteO.99)[^]
-
You're replacing a router with a G37? I hope you're getting the convertible[^].
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
That's funny Chris, I meant the other G37!, the ultimate in protection from outside forces. other g37 - surprise Actually your idea is better. That's a great looking car and yes the convertible for a little Sunday Cruise down PCH to Laguna Beach destination Las Brisas, and some Margarita's. I actually prefer Porsche 911's, just a fun driven car. Las Brisas over looking the Pacific Ocean
-
BoingBoing[^]:
Owners of Cisco/Linksys home routers got a nasty shock this week, when their devices automatically downloaded a new operating system, which locked out device owners. After the update, the only way to reconfigure your router was to create an account on Cisco's "cloud" service, signing up to a service agreement that gives Cisco the right to spy on your Internet use and sell its findings, and also gives them the right to disconnect you (and lock you out of your router) whenever they feel like it.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
Information is everything and information is king. I've never studied the CodeProject T&C but does CP sell or give away the information about its almost 10 million subscribers? I'm sure there's a lot of information in there that other companies would like to harvest and tap into. Cisco is but one facet of a multi-faceted information diamond mine.
"I do not have to forgive my enemies, I have had them all shot." — Ramón Maria Narváez (1800-68). "I don't need to shoot my enemies, I don't have any." - Me (2012).
-
Information is everything and information is king. I've never studied the CodeProject T&C but does CP sell or give away the information about its almost 10 million subscribers? I'm sure there's a lot of information in there that other companies would like to harvest and tap into. Cisco is but one facet of a multi-faceted information diamond mine.
"I do not have to forgive my enemies, I have had them all shot." — Ramón Maria Narváez (1800-68). "I don't need to shoot my enemies, I don't have any." - Me (2012).
PHS241 wrote:
I've never studied the CodeProject T&C
Oooo! You checked a box when you signed up, stating that you had read and understood the conditions... Did you not send an email first requesting clearance to join without clause 17.14.2.8(iii)? The one handing CodeProject all your worldly goods? Everyone else did! The site TOS are pretty clear: "Registration information becomes the non-exclusive property of The Code Project and may be used by The Code Project for market research, marketing, improvements to our Services, and for such purposes as may be set out in our privacy statement." http://www.codeproject.com/info/TermsOfUse.aspx[^], section 5
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
-
PHS241 wrote:
I've never studied the CodeProject T&C
Oooo! You checked a box when you signed up, stating that you had read and understood the conditions... Did you not send an email first requesting clearance to join without clause 17.14.2.8(iii)? The one handing CodeProject all your worldly goods? Everyone else did! The site TOS are pretty clear: "Registration information becomes the non-exclusive property of The Code Project and may be used by The Code Project for market research, marketing, improvements to our Services, and for such purposes as may be set out in our privacy statement." http://www.codeproject.com/info/TermsOfUse.aspx[^], section 5
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
-
And Cisco just made my list of "brands to never buy". If a free service wants to try and track me that's one thing (they have to pay their bills too, but that doesn't mean I'll make it easy for them to do it), but I will not have a product I paid for using my information as an additional revenue stream, nor will I give a company the option to shut down my personal equipment.
I was considering buying some Cisco equipment, with this, i believe i will look elsewhere. :doh:
CEO at: - Rafaga Systems - Para Facturas - Modern Components for the moment...
-
Information is everything and information is king. I've never studied the CodeProject T&C but does CP sell or give away the information about its almost 10 million subscribers? I'm sure there's a lot of information in there that other companies would like to harvest and tap into. Cisco is but one facet of a multi-faceted information diamond mine.
"I do not have to forgive my enemies, I have had them all shot." — Ramón Maria Narváez (1800-68). "I don't need to shoot my enemies, I don't have any." - Me (2012).
Welcome to the future, where goods you buy also track you for your own sake (hold on i believe i have seen this before, start with A and end with pple), what the hell is Cisco thinking of?, it is dealing with technology professionals that recommends their products, if we don't it will simply vanish from the picture.
CEO at: - Rafaga Systems - Para Facturas - Modern Components for the moment...
-
PHS241 wrote:
I've never studied the CodeProject T&C
Oooo! You checked a box when you signed up, stating that you had read and understood the conditions... Did you not send an email first requesting clearance to join without clause 17.14.2.8(iii)? The one handing CodeProject all your worldly goods? Everyone else did! The site TOS are pretty clear: "Registration information becomes the non-exclusive property of The Code Project and may be used by The Code Project for market research, marketing, improvements to our Services, and for such purposes as may be set out in our privacy statement." http://www.codeproject.com/info/TermsOfUse.aspx[^], section 5
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
In this usage, what is the definition of "non-exclusive property"? And how can my "personal and demographic information as prompted by the applicable registration form" ever be anyone's property but my own, whether exclusive or non-exclusive? Is my name and/or username now the property of The Code Project? My home or email addresses? If so, that's very disturbing. Can I terminate TCP's claim by closing my account?
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP.
-
BoingBoing[^]:
Owners of Cisco/Linksys home routers got a nasty shock this week, when their devices automatically downloaded a new operating system, which locked out device owners. After the update, the only way to reconfigure your router was to create an account on Cisco's "cloud" service, signing up to a service agreement that gives Cisco the right to spy on your Internet use and sell its findings, and also gives them the right to disconnect you (and lock you out of your router) whenever they feel like it.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
Some clarity here.. First, you have to dig a bit.. this doesn't apply to ALL Cisco routers, only their 'App Enabled Routers' that have automatic updating turned ON. I own a Cisco router (not an App Enabled one) and I didn't get auto-updated and have not been forced to sign up for the cloud. This seems a lot like a knee jerk reaction on some folks part to an ill-considered move on Cisco's part. There is no doubt that this is a seriously stupid move on Cisco's part. No doubt at all. But I'm not personally prepared to go full-paranoid on Cisco as of yet. Cisco has a reputation that must be maintained to continue to sell products. And plenty of competitors that would love to see it trip badly. Keep in mind that the internet is a giant echo chamber. It tends to magnify things due to herd behavior.. If you read the comments about this carefully you'll see that many folks don't even own Cisco.. they are just expressing their confidence that this is 'evil corporations at it again'.. a paranoid response. I've lived in the 'belly of the beast' of large corporations for more than half my career. I've never seen signs of overt evil, but I've seen PLENTY of mediocrity and outright stupdity. The writer of the original article, in my opinion, is showing an extreme lack of judgement.. none of the details around how many customers are affected/type of routers/conditions of update are even listed. Its just a 'Cisco did some evil stuff' hit piece. In a word, typical stupid reporting/commentary (something I've seen so much lately it makes my head spin). Caveat Emptor doesn't apply just to retail goods.. it goes for news too. Just my 2 cents..
-
And Cisco just made my list of "brands to never buy". If a free service wants to try and track me that's one thing (they have to pay their bills too, but that doesn't mean I'll make it easy for them to do it), but I will not have a product I paid for using my information as an additional revenue stream, nor will I give a company the option to shut down my personal equipment.
They've been on my "do not buy" list for a rather long time.
-
BoingBoing[^]:
Owners of Cisco/Linksys home routers got a nasty shock this week, when their devices automatically downloaded a new operating system, which locked out device owners. After the update, the only way to reconfigure your router was to create an account on Cisco's "cloud" service, signing up to a service agreement that gives Cisco the right to spy on your Internet use and sell its findings, and also gives them the right to disconnect you (and lock you out of your router) whenever they feel like it.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
So when does the class action lawsuit begin? This is clearly an act of fraud and theft. CISCO sold equipment to individuals and businesses and then without informing the owner of said equipment, took possession of that equipment against the wishes of the rightful owner. While the owner may still have physical possession of the equipment, CISCO installed software that prevents the owner from utilizing the equipment as originally purchased. This action violates a number of Federal and State Laws. 1. CISCO installed software onto a computer that damaged the computer. Such actions violate Federal Laws against hacking and no doubt a number of State Laws. 2. By making the device unusable as originally purchased, CISCO breached the sales contract which it had entered with the customer. 3. CISCO is violating contract law by placing owners of these devices under duress by demanding compensation (more like protectionism here) in the form of spying on owners of the devices and demanding the ability to disable the devices without due process. This is a violation of the Constitution itself. All owners of affected devices should file suite against CISCO demanding a full refund of the purchase price in addition to damages that resulted in loss of business and internet access due to CISCO infringing upon the rights of device owners. This should effectively put CISCO out of business. Anyone who thinks that doing so is to harsh a punishment of a corporation that treats them like property (slaves) in this manner, needs to have their heads examined. These actions are so contrary to liberty, freedom and the American way, CEO's and other executives should be imprisoned for their crime. For those who think that these actions are not illegal, you should consult your States contract laws as well as computer hacking laws. What is truly sad, is the fact that programmers actually went along with what is clearly criminal computer hacking. When suing, injured parties should also demand that CISCO pay for a replacement product that IS NOT a CISCO device (IE. a device manufactured by a CISCO competitors). Scott A. Tovey
-
Some clarity here.. First, you have to dig a bit.. this doesn't apply to ALL Cisco routers, only their 'App Enabled Routers' that have automatic updating turned ON. I own a Cisco router (not an App Enabled one) and I didn't get auto-updated and have not been forced to sign up for the cloud. This seems a lot like a knee jerk reaction on some folks part to an ill-considered move on Cisco's part. There is no doubt that this is a seriously stupid move on Cisco's part. No doubt at all. But I'm not personally prepared to go full-paranoid on Cisco as of yet. Cisco has a reputation that must be maintained to continue to sell products. And plenty of competitors that would love to see it trip badly. Keep in mind that the internet is a giant echo chamber. It tends to magnify things due to herd behavior.. If you read the comments about this carefully you'll see that many folks don't even own Cisco.. they are just expressing their confidence that this is 'evil corporations at it again'.. a paranoid response. I've lived in the 'belly of the beast' of large corporations for more than half my career. I've never seen signs of overt evil, but I've seen PLENTY of mediocrity and outright stupdity. The writer of the original article, in my opinion, is showing an extreme lack of judgement.. none of the details around how many customers are affected/type of routers/conditions of update are even listed. Its just a 'Cisco did some evil stuff' hit piece. In a word, typical stupid reporting/commentary (something I've seen so much lately it makes my head spin). Caveat Emptor doesn't apply just to retail goods.. it goes for news too. Just my 2 cents..
When a corporation willfully violates laws that most common people understand to be in affect, that corporation is evil. It is unlawful to install software on a device that prevents that device to be used as intended. CISCO may have utilized their auto update program to do this, but they still violated the law in doing so. In addition, by requiring those affected to create a cloud account in order to utilize the devices that they already legally purchased and own, CISCO has taken unlawful possession of the processing power of those devices. They in affect have taken possession of the device and are requiring owners to pay a fee to regain the use of their legally owned property. Regardless of user licensing agreements, CISCO did not and does not have a legal right to corrupt and disable a device that they received consideration for; from the purchaser of the device. This is corporate greed gone a muck. Not only should the CISCO executives have known better than to do this, the developers who participated in this criminal activity should have know better and refused to participate in said criminal activity. Scott A. Tovey
-
Information is everything and information is king. I've never studied the CodeProject T&C but does CP sell or give away the information about its almost 10 million subscribers? I'm sure there's a lot of information in there that other companies would like to harvest and tap into. Cisco is but one facet of a multi-faceted information diamond mine.
"I do not have to forgive my enemies, I have had them all shot." — Ramón Maria Narváez (1800-68). "I don't need to shoot my enemies, I don't have any." - Me (2012).
PHS241 wrote:
I've never studied the CodeProject T&C but does CP sell or give away the information about its almost 10 million subscribers? I'm sure there's a lot of information in there that other companies would like to harvest and tap into.
But CP is also a "free" service. We don't pay to use it, but the money to maintain it has to come from somewhere, and I'm fine with that, it's a trade: my information for CP's service. On the other hand, you have to pay Cisco for one of their routers. This is a one time payment for a physical item. You do not incur and additional cost to them after that (besides perhaps customer support, but for a good product the majority of customers will not need it, and some small bandwidth charges for software updates). There is no trade going on here, they are simply taking your data and giving you nothing in return. Personally, I find that to be unacceptable.
-
BoingBoing[^]:
Owners of Cisco/Linksys home routers got a nasty shock this week, when their devices automatically downloaded a new operating system, which locked out device owners. After the update, the only way to reconfigure your router was to create an account on Cisco's "cloud" service, signing up to a service agreement that gives Cisco the right to spy on your Internet use and sell its findings, and also gives them the right to disconnect you (and lock you out of your router) whenever they feel like it.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
-
BoingBoing[^]:
Owners of Cisco/Linksys home routers got a nasty shock this week, when their devices automatically downloaded a new operating system, which locked out device owners. After the update, the only way to reconfigure your router was to create an account on Cisco's "cloud" service, signing up to a service agreement that gives Cisco the right to spy on your Internet use and sell its findings, and also gives them the right to disconnect you (and lock you out of your router) whenever they feel like it.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
I would think that there would also be an increased risk of having the home router hacked after it has been opened to external (re)configuration. One of the Cisco Cloud promises is that it will be easier to reach inside your home network from outside ...
-
When a corporation willfully violates laws that most common people understand to be in affect, that corporation is evil. It is unlawful to install software on a device that prevents that device to be used as intended. CISCO may have utilized their auto update program to do this, but they still violated the law in doing so. In addition, by requiring those affected to create a cloud account in order to utilize the devices that they already legally purchased and own, CISCO has taken unlawful possession of the processing power of those devices. They in affect have taken possession of the device and are requiring owners to pay a fee to regain the use of their legally owned property. Regardless of user licensing agreements, CISCO did not and does not have a legal right to corrupt and disable a device that they received consideration for; from the purchaser of the device. This is corporate greed gone a muck. Not only should the CISCO executives have known better than to do this, the developers who participated in this criminal activity should have know better and refused to participate in said criminal activity. Scott A. Tovey
"Willfully" requires proof which I'm pretty sure you don't have. Was it intentional, or a mistake that was released? You *may* be right. But *may* don't cut it in a court of law (and I'm putting it this way SPECIFICALLY because you are making a *legal* type argument). I stand by my original statements. I might be what you are saying, but it also might be the result of bad process/ineptitude. You do NOT have proof either way, unless you are materially involved (which I seriously doubt). If its proven that this was with malice and forethought, I'll be behind your statements all the way. But *until* it is, I'll wait for a determination of the truth rather than jump to a conclusion, which is what everyone is basically doing.
