this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2025
480 points (99.0% liked)
Technology
77090 readers
1567 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That bit seems inaccurate... if it couldn't communicate it wasn't bricked remotely... it was more like digital seppuku.
Earlier in the article he says that he only disabled some of the network connections but he left open the ones for firmware updates and stuff so to me it's not impossible that it was able to receive remote commands although I would certainly want to see more technical details to satisfy my curiosity.
The article says in words that it was a remote command. But again, we don't have any details supporting that description. So maybe the journalist got it wrong.
Certainly. By default most home networks block incoming traffic but then again if the's the tinkerer type his network will most likely not be default.
This is something I've never understood about firewalls. If the vacuum cleaner is uploading and downloading stuff from https://somecorpo.net/, what stops it from listening for remote commands on that same connwction?