this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2024
378 points (98.5% liked)

PC Gaming

8660 readers
472 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ours@lemmy.world 75 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

Meanwhile Synology keeps updating my ageing NAS.

They may not have the best bang for the buck for hardware but their software package is really well put together.

[–] athairmor@lemmy.world 46 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Sounds like D-Link is telling people to buy Synology.

[–] DontMakeMoreBabies@lemm.ee 19 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Or just build your own? I have an eight-bay running OMV that I built using one of these cool little mini-ITX towers.

[–] NanoooK@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The "issue" I have with this case is the SFX format for the PSU, they are rare and more expensive.

[–] DontMakeMoreBabies@lemm.ee 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Not sure what you mean...? I bought a random Corsair PSU from bestbuy and it's working fine.

[–] NanoooK@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I've never said anything about your PSU not working. I've simply commented on the Jonsbo N3 that requires a PSU of SFX form factor. SFX' PSUs are more expensive and less common than the ATX one, that's it.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] RagingNerdoholic@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 weeks ago

Well whaddaya know, you get what you pay for.

That being said, companies should be legally obligated to provide security patches for a minimum number of years.

[–] rbos@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

My synology box is 8 years old now and still getting patches. I would actually buy it again. Good work.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] whodatdair@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 weeks ago

I have to say I’ve also been enjoying my synology - going on almost 7 years since this thing was released and I get security updates regularly still. Will buy again once this thing dies.

[–] FellowEnt@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago

I bought my DS212 in 2012. Still going strong after two drive swaps. And now I feel old.

[–] DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca 53 points 2 weeks ago

Alright, I'll just buy another one... from a brand that isn't shit.

[–] shoulderoforion@fedia.io 43 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I'm a little bit torn on this one, we're talking 10-15 year old devices here. The number of companies that will continue to produce emergency security patches for their hardware so old and having reached EOL four years ago in 2020 are few and far between. Caveat Emptor most definitely, but if you're someone who likes to keep their tech running forever, you're going to need to get creative, when the manufacturer eventually stops patching. For this particular instance, I'd recommend placing the unit behind a vpn on the lan.

[–] Benjaben@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah, I mean...what IS "end of life" / "end of support" other than not patching newly found issues, after long enough? Not enough info in the article to indicate any kind of bait and switch or annoyingly short support window, and the support window didn't end recently either. Seems pretty reasonable TBH.

Then again it's a lot of vulnerable devices, and doesn't sound like too hard of a fix. But for all I know they've dismantled their tooling for testing patches on those devices, etc. Would be nice if they addressed it, but I can't exactly condemn them for not.

[–] 2pt_perversion@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It looks like they just didn't neutralize/sanitize controllable input data so it should be a pretty easy fix. I think if a security researcher gives you a layup by identifying an easily fixable vulnerability a company should just take it, even if the product is old. If for no other reason than it's bad marketing when news articles like this come out.

[–] Benjaben@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah, I know what you mean, and yep it looked like just input sanitization on a very specific thing. I don't disagree, headlines being headlines, and even just broad benefit vs. overall level of effort seems pretty positive to me from an outsider's perspective.

But then again, issuing a firmware update is also an implicit guarantee that no (unrelated) functionality will degrade, which really needs a degree of testing in order to be a responsible business decision. And then on the optics side, I can see there being a benefit to a hard line in the sand regarding EOL, vs getting into the weeds of determining on a case by case basis what merits violating their own policy, and all the implications such granular judgment calls would entail (although they and all others probably must do something similar, to some degree).

Idk, I don't own much or any of their stuff these days, no real skin in the game, nor do I have any particularly relevant info or opinions on the company. Just rambling lol.

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 2 points 2 weeks ago

Most honest person in this discussion.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social 33 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yet again another reason why I won't buy proprietary systems like this. Make your own, if you know what a NAS is I'm sure you van handle it.

[–] CanadianCarl@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 weeks ago

I van handle everything... Honk Honk.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 32 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Lenovo did this when they bought Iomega NAS devices. The final firmware before they ended support added google ads to the web admin interface. So now I have it booting Debian and OpenMediaVault, bye bye Lenovo.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 30 points 2 weeks ago

And other reasons why closed-source firmware can go fuck itself.

[–] Mercuri@lemmy.world 26 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Laughs in uGreen NAS with TrueNAS.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 24 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Welp, looks like I'm changing brands next time I buy a router.

[–] ky56@aussie.zone 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Banana Pi R3 or R64 (OpenWRT). Some DIY assembly required but it will probably last you over a decade.

My favorite part about these is that they are unbrickable. There is no bootloader to permanently corrupt as the firmware that loads the flash chip is in mask memory and the firmware you load from OpenWRT is the bootloader + firmware. So even if the flash chip dies you can use the other flash chip on the board or with soldering skills replace it and re-flash it.

[–] Feddinat0r@feddit.org 23 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So now more buying D-link anymore

[–] whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works 25 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

this typo completely changes the sense of your sentence 😅

[–] Feddinat0r@feddit.org 4 points 2 weeks ago

Oh my... Really.... Thanks for pointing it out :) Of course i leave it

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] corroded@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

The article didn't specify how old the affected models are, but any time you use an all-in-one device with proprietary software, you take the risk of this happening.

To some extent, you can't really blame the manufacturers for this, either. They can't reasonably continue maintaining software for their products for an indefinite period of time. As an extreme example, I wouldn't expect the old Linksys wifi router I used in 2004 to still be receiving firmware updates.

My NAS hardware is relatively ancient, but it's regular server hardware running TrueNAS. If TrueNAS suddenly stops getting updates, there's UnRaid, or just Linux. It really goes to show the advantage of using generic hardware with open software.

[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

you can't really blame the manufacturers for this, either. They can't reasonably continue maintaining software for their products for an indefinite period of time.

Shh, anytime I say this about Windows I get people coming out of the woodwork that say Windows 7 should be supported 15 years later.

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Don't you know that it's entirely unreasonable to expect your users to have hardware that's a standard feature on any machine made in the last ten years, that can be added to existing systems for around $30 and a free card slot? /s

I don't think I'll ever understand the insistence that a TPM module is a bridge too far.

[–] InFerNo@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 weeks ago

My PC has a tpm, the CPU is simply on the unsupported list.

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Because of the sheer amount of e-waste it will generate by force-decommissioning hardware in active usage. Don't know why that's so hard to understand.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SplashJackson@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago

I expect security patches for the tires on my Model T. Ford is still around, so what's the ploblem?

[–] DerisionConsulting@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You're right in saying that these devices are basically ancient, and also right about why you should never use all-in-ones for anything that you would want to last more than a couple of years.

http://support.dlink.com.au/download/download.aspx?product=DNS-320 The age of the devices:

Firmware: 1.00
Hardware: A1
Date: 2010/9/7
First DNS-320 firmware release

[–] mp3@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

For those kind of devices, the manufacturer should be required to make it possible to easily load a third-party firmware when they declare a device as obsolete.

I understand it's not financially viable to support a device beyond a certain threshold, but there's likely a community behind those that are willing to keep these devices alive for a while longer, with the benefit of reducing the amount of ewaste.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 14 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

How is this PC gaming? Are people playing games on the NAS?

I'll allow it (my authority: some jerk that doesn't even have an account on this instance).

Part of Reddit culture was hyper narrow focus on the topics of subreddits. I wouldn't be surprised if the mods of r/samsung_galaxy removed "Overall I like my Pixel better" for being off-topic, even if it was a reply in the comment chain "I have both a Pixel 5 and an S22 and the S22 has the better camera." "Other than the camera which of the two phones do you like best?" 7 day ban, rule 4: mentions another brand of phone without also mentioning a Samsung.

That doesn't happen here on Lemmy as much and I don't mind it. While a NAS isn't necessarily directly a piece of gaming hardware, I think a lot of gamers might have one. Any who stream might save video of their play sessions to a NAS, etc. So I think this article is of peripheral interest to PC gamers.

[–] blackfire@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago

Just looked it up and the DNS-320 Version 1.00 is from 2010. I get it on the company side thats old and was a given to be out of date. People who own it should take more mitigations to protect against any unwanted connections. Or use something that doesn't rely on proprietary firmwares like truenas or unraid.

[–] umbraroze@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

Yup, doesn't surprise me.

I also have a NAS box that's out of support. Turned off all of the nifty services and firewalled the shit out of it so it won't be visible outside the LAN even by accident. Will replace it with a FreeBSD box as soon as I get a new hard drive.

[–] bear_cube@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 weeks ago

A NAS, a router or Storage server all of the are computer. Just use old computer as nas instead of throwing them away.

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

“Okay, I found a great NAS made by another company.”

D-Link: “No, wait!”

[–] lemmyng@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 weeks ago

Doesn't matter to the D-Link bean counters. Either case is a non-sale to them. Never mind that they tank whatever is left of their already terrible reputation, all they care about is immediate shareholder revenue generation, and spending money maintaining software for older hardware is a loss to them.

"buy another one you ~~rich~~ motherfuckers"

[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev 2 points 2 weeks ago

Opensource after EOL. Vote for parties that care, write to your representatives, sign petitions, and vote with your wallet.

Anti Commercial-AI license

load more comments
view more: next ›