undefined

points

[-]

Nearly every stock consumer router keeps getting these RCE’s. Perhaps that’s the point, they can get any arbitrary household in trouble if it’s expedient to do so.

by hylaride2 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

It would depend on the laws of the jurisdiction. I would imagine if you can show you kept the firmware up to date and had a secure as possible config (eg not having admin interfaces exposed to the internet), you could argue that there's no negligence - outside of maybe using a known insecure vendor; sometimes I think that would be a good idea (cough cough Fortinet).

Germany has some sensible laws about personal responsibility, like it being an offence to run out of gas on the autobahn and seriously treating driving in general as a privilege. But it requires a certain cultural mindset.

by cynicalsecurity4 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

It won't work. You would need to back up your claim with proof that someone hacked your router. You can't drive a car that is easily breakable and expect the court to clear you of any responsibility if it causes harm because it broke while you were driving.

by faidit4 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

An allegory here would be someone stealing an easily stealable car (e.g. doing the Kia Challenge) and causing damage or injury. The thief would be liable, not the owner

by SoftTalker2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Generally any damage done by a car is the responsibility of its owner. The owner will likely be sued anyway, because they have insurance and assets, and the thief (even if known) does not.

by faidit2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

> The majority common law rule among the 50 states is that the owner of a stolen vehicle will not be held liable for damages when the vehicle is stolen and then involved in an accident that causes injury or property damage. This is because the vehicle was taken without the consent of the owner, who did not cause the accident.

https://www.mwl-law.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/OWNER-LIA...

by msh4 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

But if it’s the isp delivered router they should carry the responsibility

by wildzzz3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I would assume that liability is avoided when someone has done a reasonable effort to secure the device. The user needs to make sure they've secured their router from unauthorized access by using proper passwords. The ISP needs to make sure the router is delivered with the latest firmware and is pre-configured to be secure.

by SoftTalker2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

The last few routers I've had from an ISP are totally turnkey. There's no configuration, no passwords set (maybe the local Wifi password), any config is done with an app that talks to the ISP, who then updates the router settings remotely. There isn't even an admin interface you can access from the local network side.

by ClumsyPilot1 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

I would not assume that.

Because British government has just made leaseholders of apartments liable for costs of fixing forged and fraudulently obtained fire safety certification of apartment blocks.

The manufacturers of cladding materials have forged the fire safety certificate, the construction company has not followed the law when it comes to fire breaks and other fire safety system, the government building control has examined the building and signed it off as correct, possibly corruptly.

But after a skyscraper burned down with all the residents inside, now the residents are liable.

by ClumsyPilot1 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

[dead]