dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
98
share rss forum feed


XANAVirus
Premium
join:2012-03-03
Lavalette, WV
Reviews:
·Callcentric

No deal.

Even if I were a customer of Cox (well, Suddenlink's got the same idea, offering their own service) I wouldn't take them up on this offer.

It's a data grab, that's what this is. I wouldn't let my *ISP* touch my home, at least where automation and security are involved.
Leave home security to the businesses whose entire product is this service.

An ISP should be a pipe to the Internet, not a complete home monitoring system. There's no potential for this, especially given its convenience factor (which is what they're banking on and selling the commercials about).

I have no need or want to remotely control my lights, nor do I need the ability to monitor video remotely either.
Besides, remotely-controlled lights and video feed monitoring do not a security system make.

Think of the exploitation potential!
People taking over the home video feed, watching and recording the times you're at home in order to plan when they break in to steal your stuff or kidnap your kids or you.

People remotely turning off your lights while you're at home. People remotely accessing the video feed to watch all sorts of acts being done in your home, with you as the actor for them as the audience.

Oh sure, maybe Cox (or insert-ISP-here) will secure their system using some sort of proprietary system you can't just access from a web browser -- but knowing people, convenience trumps security, so they'll probably set it up on unsecured HTTP with no authentication or something.

And finally, the grand finale, making a mobile app!

Sure, it'll definitely require a username and password, but most people don't adequately password-protect their phones anyway (figuring they'll always have it with them or if it did get found that someone would be able to use it to reach them on a house phone to give it back).

Who's to say the inevitable mobile app for this service won't just communicate in plain text over insecure HTTP or something, or store the credentials on the phone in a reversible from in plain text somewhere - then the potential attacker-person can just install the app onto their phone and use it whenever to monitor everything that goes on.

And so, for these reasons I wouldn't touch this service with a ten-foot pole (or Suddenlink's, or anybody's).

Plus, why would you want to give even more money to your ISP, for a service you don't need?


cork1958
Cork
Premium
join:2000-02-26
said by XANAVirus:

Even if I were a customer of Cox (well, Suddenlink's got the same idea, offering their own service) I wouldn't take them up on this offer.

It's a data grab, that's what this is. I wouldn't let my *ISP* touch my home, at least where automation and security are involved.
Leave home security to the businesses whose entire product is this service.

An ISP should be a pipe to the Internet, not a complete home monitoring system. There's no potential for this, especially given its convenience factor (which is what they're banking on and selling the commercials about).

I have no need or want to remotely control my lights, nor do I need the ability to monitor video remotely either.
Besides, remotely-controlled lights and video feed monitoring do not a security system make.

Think of the exploitation potential!
People taking over the home video feed, watching and recording the times you're at home in order to plan when they break in to steal your stuff or kidnap your kids or you.

People remotely turning off your lights while you're at home. People remotely accessing the video feed to watch all sorts of acts being done in your home, with you as the actor for them as the audience.

Oh sure, maybe Cox (or insert-ISP-here) will secure their system using some sort of proprietary system you can't just access from a web browser -- but knowing people, convenience trumps security, so they'll probably set it up on unsecured HTTP with no authentication or something.

And finally, the grand finale, making a mobile app!

Sure, it'll definitely require a username and password, but most people don't adequately password-protect their phones anyway (figuring they'll always have it with them or if it did get found that someone would be able to use it to reach them on a house phone to give it back).

Who's to say the inevitable mobile app for this service won't just communicate in plain text over insecure HTTP or something, or store the credentials on the phone in a reversible from in plain text somewhere - then the potential attacker-person can just install the app onto their phone and use it whenever to monitor everything that goes on.

And so, for these reasons I wouldn't touch this service with a ten-foot pole (or Suddenlink's, or anybody's).

Plus, why would you want to give even more money to your ISP, for a service you don't need?

I am probably one of the very few that will agree with you here!!

Can't believe you even thought about the "inevitable" happening!! Who thinks about that stuff? Let's just live for the moment!!

Don't know if Charter has this (or thinking about it) but if they do, I SURE AS HECK WOULD NOT let them monitor anything of mine! Yeah, they are my ISP and are monitoring some of my stuff, I'm sure, but that one can't be helped if I want HSI.
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/