Here’s the thing I don’t get… You have X provider supplying routers with vulnerable firmware that have remote support (TR-069) enabled. Why would Check Point not at least name and shame, instead of trying to market their security? I know the hack is old, but grandma isn’t probably up to date on the latest firmware that should have been upgrade through TR-069. I’m honestly more upset with the reporting than the normal residential cpe didn’t get upgraded.
But yeah, Happy Holidays everyone... Sincerely, Eric Tykwinski TrueNet, Inc. P: 610-429-8300 F: 610-429-3222 > On Dec 19, 2014, at 5:54 PM, Jay Ashworth <j...@baylink.com> wrote: > > While the flaw is 12 years old and the fix 9, the article suggests that > firmware for consumer routers may yet be being built with the vulnerable > webserver code baked in. > > If you are responsible for lots of eyeballs you might want to look at this. > > http://arstechnica.com/security/2014/12/12-million-home-and-business-routers-vulnerable-to-critical-hijacking-hack/ > > Have a nice Christmas weekend. :-) > > Cheers, > -- jra > > -- > Jay R. Ashworth Baylink > j...@baylink.com > Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 > Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII > St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
