• darkangelazuarl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    ·
    1 month ago

    The DSR-150 is still being sold on Amazon under the D-Link store. Why the hell would you end of life something you still sell.

  • Stern@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    1 month ago

    Okay so the 2015 EOL ones, yeah I can understand telling the customer to update their shit. They shouldn’t have to support nearly 10 year out of date stuff.

    May 2024 EOL ones? Bruh. C’mon now.

    • snooggums@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      1 month ago

      I would love to know when they stopped selling it compared to the EOL. EOL should be at least 5 years past the last time the models were shipped out, maybe more. So if May 2024 was EOL I sure hope they weren’t selling them after 2018.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      30 days ago

      Hopefully there’s a mistake in the article.

      • It does claim they were both discontinued this year and reached end of support this year. If that’s true, that’s huge and there should be consequences in the market.
      • if the article is poorly written and the only concern is they already passed end of support so are no longer being supported , that seems like a tautology.
    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yup, my Mikrotik router is doing great years after I bought it, and I expect to keep getting updates into the future. I used to use a LinkSys router w/ DD-WRT and later OpenWRT, and I think those are still supported to this day.

      • Steamymoomilk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        Yeah openwrt and ddrwrt are just perfection. I recently switched out my isp eero router for a gl.inet flint 2. Adgaurdhome and setting up services have been a dream! And i could actaully see what my devices where sending packets.

        MY SAMSUNG TV WAS PINGING TIKTOK WTF. blocked everything on my smart tv minus netflix and amazon. Because samsung tv uses AWS for channels

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Wow, that’s terrible. I still need to get around to blocking my smart TV as well, since we only use Netflix and our Jellyfin install on it. Thanks for a reminder. :)

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      1 month ago

      Not going to hold my breath that anything like this will happen in the current political climate, but yeah, that should be mandatory. Even ignoring the exploitive nature towards their customers, it creates a ton of unnecessary waste.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 month ago

        Exactly. As a consumer, when I buy a product, I’m not just buying the state of things at the time, I’m buying with an expectation of ongoing support. If they choose to not support it themselves, I should be able to support it myself.

        In the old days, hardware came with schematics, so when the manufacturer warranty ended, customers could repair things themselves. That should extend to software as well, since software is just as much a part of the functioning of a device as capacitors and whatnot.

      • SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        65
        ·
        1 month ago

        Companies should be forced to release all source code for products that are “EOL”. I will never change my mind on this.

      • tiredofsametab@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        43
        ·
        1 month ago

        May 1st 2024 was a decade ago? (The article has a list and only two are old as you mention, though not quite a decade yet)

      • Dran@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        1 month ago

        Because that bug was so egregious, it demonstrates a rare level of incompetence.

        • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          1 month ago

          that bug was so egregious, it demonstrates a rare level of incompetence

          I wish so much this was true, but it super isn’t. Some of the recent Cisco security flaws are just so brain-dead stupid you wonder if they have any internal quality control at all… and, well, there was the Crowdstrike thing…

          • Dran@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Idk, this was kind of a rare combination of “write secure function; proceed to ignore secure function and rawdog strings instead” + “it can be exploited by entering a string with a semicolon”. Neither of those are anything near as egregious as a use after free or buffer overflow. I get programming is hard but like, yikes. It should have been caught on both ends

          • BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            Some of the recent Cisco security flaws are just so brain-dead stupid you wonder if they have any internal quality control at all

            At the super budget prices Cisco charges, do you really expect quality control to be included? You’ve got to buy a quality control subscription for that. /s

    • oldfart@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I had a couple of dlink gigabit desktop switches. Two failed so far, one has taken down the whole network, not just devices directly connected to it, and the other one fried 2 router ports when it died. I learned my lessons about buying crappy network hardware.

      Edit: that happened within a few months, so these switches also have a very clear EOL.

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    1 month ago

    Long ago, D-Link was good but then they sold the company. Just like Alienware, Farbreware, Oaklies, etc.

  • reksas@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 month ago

    there should be list of companies that should be avoided and why, its impossible to keep track of everything like this

    • TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 month ago

      An idea for an app I came up with for a class once was one that let you scan a barcode of a product in like Walmart and get what parent company owns it, like how Nestle doesn’t like to put their name on companies they bought (or not in big text anyways).
      So if you want to avoid Coca Cola you could scan it and see who it’s owned by and if that company matches one of the ones you have blacklisted

      Fun fact, ‘peace tea’ is owned by coca cola

    • daddy32@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      Unfortunately, that list would be almost complete. It would be much easier (and realistic) to maintain its complement.

  • irotsoma@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I mean this is pretty standard in all industries regardless of whether it’s a software flaw or a physical flaw in any other kind of product. What’s the likelihood of a vacuum manufacturer replacing a part in a 15 year old product that had a 1 year warrantee even if it’s a safety issue? Sure the delivery and installation is cheaper with software, but the engineering and development isn’t, especially if the environment for building it has to be recreated.

    • SplashJackson@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      1 month ago

      I work for a manufacturer with part catalogues going back to 1921, and while the telegraph codes no longer work, you could absolutely still order up a given part, or request from us the engineering diagram for it to aid in fabricating a replacement. You can also request service manuals, wiring diagrams, etc. Don’t all half-decent manufacturers do this?

      • boonhet@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 month ago

        Now I wish you’d tell us what the company is so if I ever need anything in that industry, I’d know where to buy from.

        • SplashJackson@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          I wish I could be more specific, truly, but I would be putting myself at serious risk of doxxing myself, and I’ve made fun of a lot of bad people across Lemmy (and Reddit, once upon a time) that I would be putting myself and others at risk of retribution.

          • boonhet@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            That’s fair. This being the Fediverse, private messages aren’t private either, so protect yourself!

      • irotsoma@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        That’s assuming you’re looking for a replacement part. This is redesigning the product to work differently to fix a flaw. Like if you made a vacuum company use a different gear because the existing one was too fragile. That’s likely not something you can just swap out. First you need an engineer to decide what kind of gear and redesign everything around it to make the gear fit properly as well as creating a way for it to be easily installed by the end user or their repair service. You’re ultimately changing the functionality of the original product. Yes it’s flawed functionality, but there are tons of flawed products out there.

        • SplashJackson@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Oh, most products and components go through multiple revisions to account for either flaws in the original design or to comply with local laws (for example, health and safety requirements that did not exist at time of original design). I believe it’s imperative for every business to keep on top of these things…but perhaps I’m a bit naive.

          • irotsoma@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Sure, but then those new revisions that are currently being sold are what get updated. That’s perfectly reasonable. We don’t require physical products to go back and fix the old stuff they are no longer selling. If we said that a vacuum manufacturer has to go back and fix their old products for safety flaws to comply with modern standards, what about a company that has been around for 100 years? Do they have to go back and design and manufacture modern technology into those products that didn’t exist when they were made? What if only one person in the whole world is actually using that product anymore? How long do they need to continue to revise the product?

            • SplashJackson@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              Just wait, someday there will be 3d printers that can assemble individual elements and then we can print off any old machine we like

              • irotsoma@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                That’s already the case with a lot of things. I have a 3D scanner and printer for fixing things. Just the materials are limited to plastics that don’t need to take on load bearing tasks. I could use stronger plastics, though, if I was willing to deal with the fumes.

      • bluewing@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Been there done that. Got the tee shirt.

        While good support to customers is very valuable, trying to support a product that is decades old and shares nothing in common with current products is a plain waste of time energy and money.

        It would require someone to search out all the documentation needed to make that one part, then you need to figure out the correct process to make said part, determine if you have material on hand or need to special order something, then try to find that one old jig/fixture needed amongst a building full of 100’s of such items for the right one. Then you need to be sure that the the complete fixture is there and nothing is worn out beyond use. Then you need to make time to insert this one-off semi-custom part into the manufacturing process.

        By the time you do all this, that one 20 year old obsolete part will have perhaps cost you thousands of dollars and you still haven’t made the first piece of swarf. Imagine the shock and surprise that customer would have when they get the bill that accurately reflects the true cost.

        • SplashJackson@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 month ago

          Oh, I’ve seen or rather heard the gasps of surprise you speak of, my friend. I remember about ten years ago getting a request to source a specific part out to Nunavut, in the Canadian Arctic. It was would have been pricier than just getting a whole new unit, for their purposes. We did provide them with the engineering drawings so that they could get a local shop to machine the parts, but I don’t know if they ever went that route.

    • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 month ago

      What you’re saying is perfectly reasonable, but also doesn’t apply here because they’re still selling this router new on the D-link Amazon store.

      If you’re going to stop supporting a product, you should also stop selling it.

      • irotsoma@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 month ago

        As far as I can tell, those aren’t from authorized resellers or even from Amazon itself which they might have some ability to stop selling them. These are just people who are using amazon marketplace to sell off old stock like any other product. D-link hasn’t sold them for a while. But I could be wrong, I just haven’t seen any evidence that they are selling them. If Bissel had a vacuum that had a faulty gear that would break after a few years of use and they stopped making them, that wouldn’t stop someone from buying them up from Walmart or other store warehouses that no longer sold them and listing them for sale on Amazon or Walmart or whatever marketplace. That’s very common.

          • irotsoma@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            This is a misunderstanding of how Amazon works. There’s a difference from them showing up as products on their “store” and them actually selling them.

            Anything that was a product of that company will show if you go to their store and search for it. But if you look at the options for actually buying them you’ll see that they are being sold by third parties.

            For example, if you go to this link https://a.co/d/eFXaSFJ for the DSR-150 you’ll see that there are only 3 sellers. The new is shipped and sold by HOLLITRONIC and the others are used and shipped and sold by other sellers. None of the products on the list, as far as I could find, were being sold by D-link or Amazon itself. D-link has no control over the Amazon marketplace and honesty Amazon doesn’t do much to control it even.

    • wholookshere
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 month ago

      This is why a number of countries have laws saying spare parts must be made available for a number of years past being sold. Well beyond what the warranty is.

      How is this significantly different?

      • ramjambamalam@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        I’d also settle for releasing 3D models of out-of-production parts so they can be 3D-printed by enthusiasts.

        Story time: in my second-gen Mazda Miata, I closed the centre console lid on a piece of cardstock by accident and it snapped the plastic piece that latches the lid shut. The part previously sold for ~$10 but they stopped producing it as a standalone part at some point and the only way to acquire it was to buy the $100 centre console lid assembly.

        • wholookshere
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          Software 100% needs to be included in support.

          Old devices that become vulnerable but still accessible on the internet, eventually become part of bot nets producing DDOS and other network attacks.

      • irotsoma@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        This isn’t spare parts. This is asking for a new part to be designed and manufactured to replace an existing part. That takes time and money. Granted software doesn’t require mass production, but creating the initial version does take expertise and resources that may no longer exist in addition to the time and money.

        • wholookshere
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          You think spare parts don’t cost money? Wearhouse space is expensive. Massive part stores have to be made. That’s all expense needed to take on by auto manufacturers. Why would software be different?

          Either that or they keep all the tooling, which again is expensive. And people need to know how to use the tooling too.

          This isn’t a “it’d be nice” kind of patch. This is exactly how we get massive bot nets for DDOS attacks. Devices become vulnerable, scans go out on the internet looking for devices they can exploit, and when they do, they gather bot nets.

          It’s also not creating something new. It’s fixing your shit. They don’t have to create the entire software stack from scratch, just fix the exploit. If they can’t reasonably do that, then these devices need to be taken offline.

          • irotsoma@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            I’m not saying they shouldn’t fix the issue necessarily, assuming it’s even possible. I’m saying they shouldn’t be held to higher standards than any other product just because the engineering effort involved in software is undervalued compared to physical objects. If a product made 15 years ago didn’t follow modern safety standards and is no longer being sold by the manufacturer, we don’t make them update their old products.

            As for tooling, yes, and with software it often requires “tooling” that no longer exists in order to develop the patch including hardware that may no longer be manufactured. It’s not like the product manufacturer manufactures all of the parts like circuits and microchips. Just like vacuum manufacturers don’t usually make the bearings and gears and such, they just assemble them. So same concept.

            We may require them to keep parts with the existing design, but we don’t require them to fix safety issues that were not found to be out of compliance when it was originally approved for production. We might make them fix it if they’re still selling them, but we don’t make them fix these issues if they are not.

            • wholookshere
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              We do take cars that fail safety inspections off the road. You are correct, we don’t hold them to higher standards, but that’s not a reason why we also shouldn’t remove genuine hazards off the roads.

              If a car is far more likely to kill someone, it shouldn’t be on public roads either. Just like devices that can’t be update don’t belong on public nets. The risk to the broader public is to big IMO.

              • irotsoma@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                Those are things that get inspected regularly because of public safety issues, not ownership issues, and in the US at least, that only happens in a subset of states anyway. That is about using something you know will likely hurt someone vs using something you know will hurt you and possibly your customers. There’s a big difference in liability there.

                Vacuums for example do not get regular inspections, and owners are allowed to use any product they want, even defective ones, in their own home or business, even if they pose, say, an electrical shock risk or something else that wasn’t something that would have made it fail its initial certification. We don’t force vacuum manufacturers to fix old product design issues.

                And even if we did, how long back would we make them fix? Would 100 year old vacuums need to be brought up to modern safety standards like grounded plugs and all of the wiring to be redone to ground all the parts or more modern motors that use less power so they don’t need to be grounded? What if only one person in the whole world still uses that product?

                It’s just not a reasonable thing to expect re-engineering old devices when a new potential owner safety issue is found.

                • wholookshere
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  The risk of taking down large portions of the internet has the same risks as a vacuum? Interesting.

                  Your right not every device has parts availability. But again, why not? Because it it’ll cost more?

                  Your willing to risk tanking the digital economy for what has historically been huge sums of money, because we don’t hold vacuum cleaners to higher standards?

                  I’m being obtuse, but you keep pointing to “well we don’t fix that problem over there, so we shouldn’t do it over here”. It doesn’t sway me. We should absolutely fix repability of ALL ELECRONTICS AND CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE

    • snooggums@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Someone can generally make 3rd party fixes for hardware flaws of discontinued products without the same kinds of threats software gets. Like replacement antennas or vaccuum bags.

      Compiled software can’t be legally decompiled for use in distributing software fixes.

      • irotsoma@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        That’s not necessarily true. That’s a copyright issue. Now if d-link was to say that the product was not abandoned and thus the copyright is still theirs, then you might have a case that they need to fix the issue. That doesn’t mean they need to give you the code, but decompiling should be OK. But copyright laws vary quite a bit. So that’s a totally separate issue.

        But you are welcome to write your own firmware and install it on the device in most localities. You just need write it from scratch, just like replacing a custom gear or motor in a vacuum would require engineering it to fit inside the case and connect with all the appropriate parts. Which you are welcome to do.

  • skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    but does it run openwrt?

    e: no it doesn’t, only one model had half-baked image made and available for download from some sketchy forum post made in 2014

  • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 month ago

    I moved to an OPNsense router a couple of years ago and I’ve never looked back. Hell is shitty consumer routers.

      • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        30 days ago

        Oh man, it’s a nightmare and I just happened to be lucky. I ended up buying one of those passively cooled router-esque N100 boxes out of China (AliExpress) and while it was a total punt it turned out to be a great experience, and their customer service was actually good too.

        Kingdel was the make/vendor and it’s been rock solid.

        • Tick Dracy@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          28 days ago

          I see. Currently I’m using an Asus one with Asus-WRT but I’m thinking of moving to an OPNSense one.

    • Deebster@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 month ago

      I watched and enjoyed that one yesterday, and he’s bang on the money. People here are saying “well it’s EoL” but that means it’s got all the way through development and its full lifetime with such a prominent set of bugs.

      I don’t think I’ll be buying D-Link if that’s what supported means.

  • andyortlieb@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Commodity hardware & open source software for the win.

    When my Western Digital NAS was never going to get critical security patches, I was so freaking glad to find out that they just used software raid… I threw the HDDs in a Debian server and never looked back.

    It’s certainly nice to have things that are turn-key, but if you can find your way around any OS, just avoid proprietary everything.