Post #2316459

2026-05-08 22:09 UTC

@dalias@hachyderm.io @tyzbit@toot.now @iagox86@infosec.exchange nope. Yes, it’s an insecure fucking mess. But frankly, everything’s an insecure fucking mess. We compensate, not burn it all down. Yes, this needs remedy. Yes, the attention this is getting is a good way to force remedy. No, it’s neither legal nor ethical to brick other people’s stuff regardless of how fucked the vendor’s security is. And a mower isn’t even on my top-ten ‘lethally-insecure’ categories. Fire up some shodan queries and realize just how often crit infrastructure, medical devices, transport / traffic / port authority, military, or financial OT/IoT devices are weakly- or not-secured.

Replies (2)

@dalias@hachyderm.io 2026-05-09 01:01

@cascheranno@hachyderm.io @tyzbit@toot.now @iagox86@infosec.exchange The difference is that hacking those other things you mentioned puts people's lives in danger while bricking lazy rich people's menacing robo-lawnmowers... doesn't. You're not going to convince me it's unethical to brick these things. I consider it ethical to brick Google robotaxis (while they're not in motion) ethical too. And a lot of similar things.

Open ##2316460
@yacc143@mastodon.social 2026-05-09 01:11

@cascheranno@hachyderm.io If you see it as a private thing. Consider it a couple 1000 of armed spy bots of the Chinese communist party in the USA and don't expect the government to respect property right in that clearly framework national security situation. @dalias@hachyderm.io @tyzbit@toot.now @iagox86@infosec.exchange

Open ##2316467