| HN Mirror

They got framed by a disgruntled employee a while back to make it look like an insider had leaked user data. I didn't see any mention of Ubiquiti on this page at all, but that may have been the reason if this guy isn't up to date on what happened. The other thing is their devices are enterprise devices and tend to require remote management capabilities, which this guy appears to always be against for home devices.

It's worth understanding the whys of the tradeoffs for these types of enterprise WAPs that are remote-management only. They're often installed in more or less public places like airport lobbies, hotel hallways, stadiums. The ability to gain physical access is trivial and you really don't want anyone who can get physical access to be able to configure the device. Even in corporate settings, you don't want an employee who can get access to a device to be able to configure it, either. So having remote-only management, protected by all of the usual account provisioning that would protect any other critical service, makes a lot of sense.

Does it make sense in the home? That depends. This guy, and probably a lot of consumers, really distrust any and all vendors, Ubiquiti included. But do you trust everyone in your home? I had a houseguest almost all of last summer. My wife's friend needed a place to stay after leaving his wife for a few months. I barely know the guy. I have Aruba WAPs, not Ubiquiti, but same idea. They can only be configured via an account-based mobile management app. This meant I could force his devices onto guest WiFi and there was no way for him to get around, even though he was in my house and could plug an ethernet cable into the WAPs if he wanted to. Do you trust all of your kids' friends or house party guests? More or less than the people who develop the mobile management app for your enterprise networking products?