[beebeepka]

Interesting. Do you think these phones were made that way by design? I am having a real hard time believing people with capability to produce these products are unable to secure them in any meaningful way.

Maybe I'm just too cinycal

[brk]

IME, it is sort of by design. I have worked for a number of companies developing forms of embedded products. It often felt like nobody really felt like the product was 'complete' until we were 8 or so major releases into things. So you wind up with things like SSH, FTP, etc. either directly enabled, or easily enabled via a not-very-well-hidden method to allow the dev or support teams to get into devices that were not behaving properly in the field so that they could diagnose/fix issues.

It's only been about the last 4 years or so that companies have started to realize the risks in operating this way, and I feel that a lot of that has been brought on by the end-user/buyer organization starting to require cyber security audits and asking more questions about cyber security during the buying cycle.

[janto]

Indeed. The biggest immediate risk to a newly developed product is that it won't even have any users, much less a sufficiently interested attacker. So why add initial obstacles for yourself, right? So yeah, if effort to increase security is not valued by the buyer it ain't gonna happen.