Why ‘designed for security’ is a dubious designation

If you want to understand the pitfalls to serving America’s post-Snowden craving for secure technology, look no further than Anonabox, the crowd-funded privacy-enhancing home router. That project raised an astonishing $630,000 last year in campaigns on the crowd funding websites Kickstarter and Indiegogo by promising to protect its customers’ online privacy with a box that redirected all their Internet traffic through the anonymous ToR network.

As Wired.com reported last week, Anonabox’s parent company, Sochule Inc., had to recall devices it shipped to customers after an independent researcher discovered serious security flaws in the product. Those flaws would make it easy for anyone within wireless range of the Anonabox to connect to- and take control of the device. Quite simply: Anonabox – designed to offer extra security for Internet users- was actually proved less secure even than the consumer broadband routers its was supposed to supplant.

To read this article in full or to leave a comment, please click here

Read more: Why ‘designed for security’ is a dubious designation

Story added 15. April 2015, content source with full text you can find at link above.