[HN Gopher] Ubiquiti Networks Breach
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Ubiquiti Networks Breach
        
       Author : ShaneCurran
       Score  : 268 points
       Date   : 2021-01-11 19:36 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (mailchi.mp)
 (TXT) w3m dump (mailchi.mp)
        
       | rodgerd wrote:
       | This is a terrible public notification. What is the scope of the
       | breach? Their forum software? The accounts Unifi customers can
       | use for cloud-based admin of their private networks? Support
       | tickets?
       | 
       | It doesn't inspire one iota of confidence. Quite the opposite.
        
         | bigmattystyles wrote:
         | On top of that, this is not like Hertz or Avis suffering a
         | breach, networks and network security is sort of a big deal to
         | ubiquiti. I know they are a more of a networking company than a
         | computer security company but their offerings do emphasize
         | secure networking.
        
         | reaperducer wrote:
         | I think trying to get the notice out to users directly and
         | quickly is at least one iota.
         | 
         | Details can some later, once the threat is fully evaluated.
         | 
         | If it waited until all the facts are in to put out a full fact
         | sheet, the HN griefers would be jumping ugly that it took too
         | long and was covering things up.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | alkonaut wrote:
       | Did they email everyone with an account this information? I.e.,
       | if I didn't get that email, I don't have an account?
       | 
       | You can't check via a login page whether you have an account...
        
         | ThisIsTheWay wrote:
         | I can't speak for everyone, but yes, I received an email about
         | my account.
        
       | lkxijlewlf wrote:
       | Wish they would roll Wireguard up into the firmware distribution
       | for the edgrouter-x.
        
       | johnklos wrote:
       | My goodness. How stupid does everyone involve need to be to put
       | out a statement like this with a "mailchi.mp" URL, WITH PASSWORD
       | RESET BUTTONS?
       | 
       | What the hell is wrong with these people?
        
       | politelemon wrote:
       | This ought to be on their blog, rather than mailchimp, no?
        
         | switz wrote:
         | Not to mention this was confusing to me; I'm sitting here
         | wondering if Ubiquiti is a parent company of Mailchimp. It
         | seems like that's not the case.
         | 
         | If I was mailchimp, I'd be a tad peeved, but I guess that's a
         | downside of hosting a business' content.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | based2 wrote:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubiquiti_Networks
        
       | lpgauth wrote:
       | What systems were breached? I haven't received an email...
       | 
       | Is UNMS ok?
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | ch0I9daAiO wrote:
       | There's a neat docker container you can run for their management
       | application instead of using Cloud(tm).
        
       | 29athrowaway wrote:
       | The Ubiquiti Cloud Key is the worst product I have ever
       | purchased.
        
         | clajiness wrote:
         | Ok. Why? I have one and it's great.
        
       | rsync wrote:
       | Ubiquiti is slowly becoming Sonos.
       | 
       | The difference is, their potential for bad behavior, risks and
       | attack surface is far, far greater.
        
         | e40 wrote:
         | Yes, that is worrying. I never hooked my USG up to the cloud,
         | opting to run it from a local docker container.
        
         | hsbauauvhabzb wrote:
         | What's wrong with Sonos? I'm about to drop a bunch on a full
         | home setup, should I consider an alternative?
        
           | secabeen wrote:
           | Many people dislike the cloud-focus of sonos. When they
           | started, the primary use case was streaming off of SMB
           | shares, but now it's streaming from cloud providers. Given
           | that all of your music is coming from the cloud, is it really
           | that much of a stretch that your sonos hardware is heavily
           | backed by cloud services too? It really does help ease-of-use
           | for non-technical folk.
        
           | imposterr wrote:
           | Would recommend reading through the previous threads on HN.
           | 
           | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que.
           | ..
        
       | 3guk wrote:
       | I must admit - Ubiquiti has lost some of it's shine in the last
       | few years, whilst AP and routing hardware seems to still be very
       | good in terms of pricepoint, it does feel like the software side
       | of things has been going in a very strange direction for quite
       | some time.
       | 
       | I'm still quite annoyed by the fact that I was forced to migrate
       | from Unifi Video to Unifi Protect - due to vendor lock in and the
       | fact that the remote interface for Unifi Video was switched off
       | this month.
       | 
       | I guess on the plus side - no one who is still using Unifi Video
       | has to worry all that much.....
       | 
       | Hopefully it is just a case of resetting passwords and enabling
       | 2FA if you haven't done it already - not entirely sure how much
       | damage could be done otherwise, unless there is an undocumented
       | backdoor into Ubiquiti products ?
        
         | pieno wrote:
         | Agree on Ubiquiti losing their shine. They seem to have fallen
         | for the classic trap of vendors selling hardware without fully
         | factoring in the cost of maintaining software and "cloud"
         | infrastructure. So now their "growth hackers" have to keep
         | coming up with things that should just be add-ons or bug fixes
         | but instead they sell them as a premium feature or new product
         | to make up for a lack of recurring revenue.
         | 
         | Basically they are alienating their existing customer base (who
         | have already paid a premium price for the prosumer product
         | upfront and expect things to Just Work for the price) in favour
         | of convincing the next idiot to fund their OPEX with shiny new
         | features and toys that are a quick sell. Not realising (or
         | unwilling to realise) that this strategy is completely in
         | contradiction with their reputation and brand image as
         | trustworthy prosumer hardware vendor, and just adds to the
         | underlying issue.
         | 
         | I predict that it won't be long before they run out of cash or
         | investor confidence and have to sell out to a large consumer
         | hardware vendor with deep pockets that will try to capture the
         | Ubiquiti premium margins by selling their lower-value existing
         | consumer gear under the Ubiquiti brand. I applaud them for
         | having come this far while maintaining most of their integrity
         | and reputation, but I'm afraid their strategy is doomed to fail
         | and it's starting to show.
        
         | ex_ubiquiti wrote:
         | Ubiquiti had a steady exodus of engineers in the past few
         | years. It's a very different company now compared to the glory
         | days of UniFi.
        
           | rossjudson wrote:
           | Doesn't it seem like one of the missing measurements for
           | directors/VPs should be "amount of disappearing expertise"?
        
       | bacondude3 wrote:
       | PSA: with Mailchimp URLs, it's best to remove the `?e=xxx` URL
       | parameter. That way, A) you can't be identified by the sender as
       | the person who shared the email, and B) other people can't flood
       | your inbox by clicking the "unsubscribe" link at the bottom of
       | the email.
       | 
       | In this case, the cleaned URL that should have been posted is
       | https://mailchi.mp/ubnt/account-notification
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | ashtonkem wrote:
       | As someone who was planning on buying Ubiquiti hardware for their
       | house, this breach and a lot of the comments here are
       | disconcerting. Are there any other alternatives that are more
       | locally managed that people would recommend?
        
         | hamstercat wrote:
         | You can disable remote login in the settings. It's the first
         | thing I did when I got mine. So it's impossible to login to my
         | router using my Ubiquiti account.
         | 
         | Can't comment on issues have been getting, but I only have good
         | things to say about mine. It's not perfect and the learning
         | curve can be steep, but it's miles ahead of any other routers
         | I've used before. The only thing that came close was when I
         | flashed dd-wrt on my old Linksys.
        
         | dustinmoris wrote:
         | I have a TP-Link Mesh network in my house. I have high speed
         | WiFi even in my garden. 50+ devices connected. Took me 30min to
         | install everything. Didn't have a single issue in 3 years yet.
         | Saved lots of money in comparison to Ubiquiti. But what do I
         | know, I only use internet for normal activities like smart home
         | stuff, streaming, working and so on...
        
         | fullstop wrote:
         | I use a fair amount of their equipment at home and I don't
         | think that you need to be concerned with this. I run my
         | controller on a server in my basement, and no part of it
         | (besides the WAN port on my ERL) touch the internet. There is
         | no "cloud" requirement.
         | 
         | The "dream machine" thing I don't get. I do like their Unifi AP
         | line, though.
        
           | jlgaddis wrote:
           | Are you aware that they added telemetry a while back?
        
             | fullstop wrote:
             | Yes, I have disabled it. You can also drop outbound traffic
             | for the uid running the controller with iptables if you're
             | paranoid about it.
        
             | OminousWeapons wrote:
             | You are presented with the ability to opt out of data
             | collection in your management console.
        
           | OminousWeapons wrote:
           | I agree, I don't understand the level of hate appearing in
           | this thread. I use Ubiquiti gear at multiple sites and it is
           | absolutely bullet proof and trivial to set up once you
           | understand their model. As long as you aren't running remote
           | access then losing control of your UI.com credentials is
           | really a non-issue.
        
         | amacneil wrote:
         | Ubiquiti hardware and software is still amazing, and I'm
         | willing to bet there are far more satisfied users than the few
         | people grumbling on this forum. Cloud login is not mandatory if
         | you choose not to enable it.
         | 
         | No products are perfect, but for the use case of "more
         | technical than average user" looking for better quality than
         | your typical home-grade gear, I have not found anything better
         | or more polished.
        
         | sitharus wrote:
         | If you include a cloud key in the network there's no need to
         | connect to the ubiquity cloud. The cloud key runs an entirely
         | local ubiquity management stack.
        
           | ashtonkem wrote:
           | Ah, so my plan to buy a Dream Machine Pro would effectively
           | mitigate this.
        
       | rangersanger wrote:
       | I did a double take after clicking through- when did Unifi change
       | their URL to UI.com? I thought this was a clever scaled phishing
       | attempt for a second.
       | 
       | Come to think of it, how many times have they changed their
       | URL/how many are there? feels like im being trained to do
       | something stupid.
        
         | e40 wrote:
         | It's been that for as long as I can remember, but that's only a
         | year or two.
        
       | ocdtrekkie wrote:
       | This is why cloud login for network devices is terrible. I use an
       | EdgeRouter at home with no cloud connection and I'm quite happy
       | with it, but I've used UniFi in another setting, and I am not
       | thrilled at the ease of getting internal passwords and the like
       | set on devices from any web browser, for instance.
       | 
       | Another company's network products I work with technically has a
       | self-hosted version of their management service, but it doesn't
       | scale down well (it expects dozens of GBs of RAM and to be
       | running on SSD storage or it's not supported). I've regularly
       | felt pressured to move to the cloud just to avoid the jankiness.
        
       | myggan wrote:
       | At least we know third party have access to our salted passwords
       | et. al?
        
         | verst wrote:
         | Sounds like their cloud provider environment was breached. If
         | that's the case then access to databases with salted and hashed
         | passwords is to be expected, is it not?
         | 
         | Would be good to know which provider this is and whether it was
         | the fault of the provider itself.
        
           | myggan wrote:
           | You are right. Would be interesting to know who it is.
           | Couldn't find anything for AWS atm. That could be big, but
           | let's hope it's nothing to worry about. I appreciate they
           | communicate this notice asap. Even if we don't have the
           | details yet.
        
           | TavsiE9s wrote:
           | As some of the IPv4 addresses for ui.com seem to be assigned
           | to AWS I'm not sure what to make of it.
        
             | jandrese wrote:
             | Improperly secured S3 bucket? That's hit more companies
             | than I can count.
        
       | wnevets wrote:
       | I still haven't gotten an email, does that mean I'm not affected
       | or just a delay in the queue?
        
       | yskchu wrote:
       | More discussions on Ubiquiti subreddit:
       | 
       | https://www.reddit.com/r/Ubiquiti/comments/kv9fc8/ubiquiti_e...
        
       | ziddoap wrote:
       | No specific comments to the breach... But, I couldn't help but
       | chuckle at We Take Your Security Seriously(tm).
       | 
       | Why does every company, after demonstrating a lack of security,
       | like to say this exact line? I can just imagine the PR person
       | hovering over the shoulder of whoever authored the post yelling
       | "make sure you tell the victims of this breach that we care!"
        
         | kenniskrag wrote:
         | > That phenomenon is called counter-signaling, which I first
         | ran into listening to Dan Jurafsky making the point that if a
         | menu uses the word "fresh", its a low-brow restaurant. A high-
         | brow restaurant would never use the word "fresh" -- the
         | freshness is implicit in the other signals.
         | https://kelley.iu.edu/riharbau/cs-randfinal.pdf
         | 
         | source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25713050
        
           | jiveturkey wrote:
           | Italian franchise[0] restaurant in Sacramento has this huge
           | neon sign in their window: "health inspected". _Neon_. It 's
           | just that one instance of the store. Not that I've seen them
           | all, but never seen that signage in their other stores.
           | 
           | [0] Maybe not technically a franchise. Not sure. There are a
           | bunch in California.
        
             | MasterScrat wrote:
             | Reminds me of a restaurant in Goa, India, which proudly
             | advertises: "Vegetables are cleaned with _clean_ water
             | before use! "
        
         | hsbauauvhabzb wrote:
         | They opted to TELL people about it which is a good indicator.
         | I'm sure there's many companies who choose not to (which may be
         | against the law). It's also HR spin on the topic, but iirc
         | ubiquity offer bug bounties on a range of devices they sell so
         | there's at least some truth to the spin.
         | 
         | 'We know they breached but don't know what they did' is an
         | interesting statement. One POV is that they didn't have
         | sufficient logging and segregation to determine how widespread
         | the breach was, the other is that they're not arrogant enough
         | to think their SIEM adequately captures everything.
        
           | ziddoap wrote:
           | I'm unsure how your statement is meant as a response to mine.
           | I obviously agree that it is a good indicator that they
           | notified customers of a breach.
        
           | jlgaddis wrote:
           | > _They opted to TELL people about it which is a good
           | indicator._
           | 
           | Aren't they based in California which, if I remember
           | correctly, as a law _requiring_ them to notify the victims of
           | a data breach?
           | 
           | Would they still have chosen to in the absence of such a law?
           | We'll never know, I guess.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | jiveturkey wrote:
         | The real genius in the announcement is, "data hosted by a third
         | party provider". Absolutely irrelevant, but subtly implying
         | that the error was the fault of a third party.
         | 
         | That will be the new norm in these kinds of annoucements, I'm
         | sure.
         | 
         | Just like SolarWinds dropping "Team City", saying "no evidence"
         | of a breach of it. So why mention it at all?
        
         | throwaway5752 wrote:
         | It's impossible to secure yourself against a devoted persistent
         | threat group over the long term. The asymmetry of effort is not
         | tractable to overcome.
         | 
         | So they can take your security seriously, but they will be
         | hacked, or they have already.
        
           | ziddoap wrote:
           | I don't think my post argues, or even attempts to argue,
           | against your point.
           | 
           | It was a light-hearted jest at the fact that this exact line
           | is in every single breach notification I have read for the
           | past few years.
           | 
           | The more serious point I was alluding at was not "just don't
           | get breached", it was that the "we care" line rings hollow
           | after the 250th time reading it.
        
             | throwaway5752 wrote:
             | My misread, apologies. I think the "we care" is a dodge
             | around the reality that most are uncomfortable with, which
             | is, "we make your data safe as possible but we will likely
             | be hacked and you should compartmentalize your personal
             | data accordingly with that expectation". But I am no good
             | with marketing.
        
               | pseudalopex wrote:
               | Most companies choose to collect data they don't have to.
        
           | luser007 wrote:
           | They put all of their users eggs in one basket in the cloud.
           | That makes for a very interesting target.
           | 
           | They could have not done that. The users were probably
           | unaware that their data was even placed on the cloud servers
           | of some third party.
           | 
           | Ubiquiti used to be cool. They've taken a nose dive in recent
           | years in several ways: Firmware upgrade suddenly including
           | telemetry by default, forcing people to use their NVR
           | appliance instead of installing their software on their
           | private servers, etc.
           | 
           | Had Ubiquiti not moved people to "cloud solutions" an
           | attacker would have to attack millions of peoples equipment.
           | Now he only had to attack one providers network.
        
             | unethical_ban wrote:
             | I heard rumors about the telemetry thing, but that is
             | usually an overhyped concern - unless it is sending flow
             | logs or something.
             | 
             | When did they stop allowing people to use a private server
             | for central management? I see Unifi still has a network
             | controller.
        
               | luser007 wrote:
               | Sorry for being obtuse - it wasn't my intention.
               | 
               | I'm thinking of "Unifi Video" that is going out (EOL
               | announced six months ago), where you could either buy
               | their appliance OR download an official .deb package and
               | install the NVR software on your own server.
               | 
               | They replace that with "Unifi Protect" that comes ONLY as
               | an NVR appliance. No more .deb packages. It also requires
               | you to buy one of their other products (Cloud Key 2),
               | IIRC.
        
           | sounds wrote:
           | I think it is possible to secure yourself against a devoted,
           | persistent threat group.
           | 
           | I think it's expensive, but possible.
           | 
           | Do you have data to back up your claim that no one, ever has
           | ever successfully remained secure?
        
             | not2b wrote:
             | No one could possibly prove this kind of negative.
        
               | snoshy wrote:
               | Why not? All you have to do is point to one particular
               | company whose systems have not been verifiably breached
               | after having resisted actual attempts.
        
               | someguydave wrote:
               | most attacker groups would be unlikely to share that
               | result
        
               | WaitWaitWha wrote:
               | > one particular company whose systems have not been
               | verifiably breached
               | 
               | The unknown unknown. How can you be sure all the
               | "resisted actual attempts" been even detected?
        
               | aborsy wrote:
               | By ruling out known knowns, known unknowns and unknown
               | knowns.
        
               | imoverclocked wrote:
               | Challenge accepted?
               | 
               | Just because known attempts have failed doesn't mean the
               | unknown ones have too.
        
             | swirepe wrote:
             | My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings; Look on my Works, ye
             | Mighty, and despair!
        
             | rodgerd wrote:
             | What evidence do you have that anyone has?
        
               | ikiris wrote:
               | When was the last time you heard of a google user data
               | breach?
        
               | rodgerd wrote:
               | https://www.forbes.com/sites/kateoflahertyuk/2018/10/09/g
               | oog...
               | 
               | https://arstechnica.com/information-
               | technology/2013/11/googl...
               | 
               | Maybe you should know _literally anything_ about the
               | topic at hand before making sweeping assertions? I
               | realise that 's asking a lot here at HN, but it would
               | improve the site a lot.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | mirthflat83 wrote:
         | I mean, should they say that they don't care about your
         | security?
        
           | kenniskrag wrote:
           | they should tell me, what they are going to improve. :)
        
           | ziddoap wrote:
           | Weird polar opposite stance.
           | 
           | No, that is not what I'm saying. I'm saying don't put
           | platitudes in a breach notification.
        
         | BHSPitMonkey wrote:
         | It rolls off the tongue better than "We now wish to begin
         | taking your security seriously"
        
       | tiernano wrote:
       | Bit more from reddit ubiquiti forum.
       | https://reddit.com/r/Ubiquiti/comments/kv9fc8/ubiquiti_email...
        
       | p0p0bawa wrote:
       | ooooh, turn off "Remote Management" if you use Unifi products and
       | are concerned
       | 
       | https://help.ui.com/hc/en-us/articles/115012240067-UniFi-How...
        
       | exabrial wrote:
       | Ubiquiti has typically been the "cloudless" provider which is why
       | I've used their stuff. They've been sorta moving in a disturbing
       | direction for cloud control. I don't want that risk.
        
         | centimeter wrote:
         | Cloudless if and only if you run their gigantic bloated Java
         | network management tool.
         | 
         | I really like ubiquiti hardware but I got fed up with their
         | software BS. Now I use either Mikrotik or TP-Link's industrial
         | offerings. Both are way easier to work with than ubiquiti and
         | the hardware is usually in the same tier.
        
           | vetinari wrote:
           | Mikrotik? Easier?
           | 
           | Do not get me wrong, I love Mikrotik, but _easier_ would not
           | the word I would be using. This image (https://www.reddit.com
           | /r/mikrotik/comments/jyjgnc/mikrotik_v...) sums it up neatly.
           | 
           | Also, Mikrotik is not directly comparable, you cannot replace
           | Unifi Controller with Capsman.
        
           | exabrial wrote:
           | ... we run it on a raspberrypi. Not sure I'd call that
           | gigantic or bloated.
        
             | jandrese wrote:
             | RasPis have a fair bit more grunt than people give them
             | credit for.
             | 
             | The big problem with the Ubiquti thing is that it takes a
             | long time to start, so if your usage model is to start it
             | whenever you want to make a change it's rather piggish. If
             | you start it once and leave it running forever on a
             | dedicated device it's not nearly as bad.
        
             | NikolaeVarius wrote:
             | Its not a great solution. The application logs and writes
             | to storage alot.
             | 
             | Also it usually works fine, but when it breaks, it breaks
             | HARD
        
           | sjm-lbm wrote:
           | They have a little device (IIRC they call it "cloud key" or
           | something like that) that runs that interface pretty well.
           | Much better than setting that UI up on a device yourself.
        
           | imposterr wrote:
           | You can also just run a docker container for it [0]. This has
           | the added benefit of separating your data from the runtime so
           | you can move it around as if you had a physical cloud key.
           | 
           | [0] https://hub.docker.com/r/linuxserver/unifi-controller
        
             | centimeter wrote:
             | I shouldn't have to run a docker appliance for my network
             | appliances to function. Are you kidding me?
        
               | secabeen wrote:
               | You don't. The docker appliance (or whatever platform you
               | use to run the controller) only is needed for config
               | changes. You can shut it down when finished making
               | changes and everything runs fine. The install at my mom's
               | house has the Windows controller, and I don't think it's
               | run in 6 months.
        
           | jlgaddis wrote:
           | I've been running the Unifi controller on a Raspberry Pi 2
           | for four or five years now with no problems that I can
           | recall.
           | 
           | After the initial installation and configuration was done,
           | I've probably only logged into it a handful of times.
           | 
           | (With the exception of their APs and said controller, I avoid
           | Ubiquiti as much as possible, though.)
        
           | alex_suzuki wrote:
           | You don't need their Java client (which I agree, is BS) if
           | you use a Cloud Key or a UDM PRO.
        
       | bluedino wrote:
       | Ubiquiti is in a weird market, where they are better than
       | Linksys/Netgear etc, but they are crap compared to something like
       | Meraki.
       | 
       | Their support isn't very good (they point you to a forum), their
       | hardware replacement is spotty (sorry, out of stock, you'll have
       | to wait!), and their hardware/software is buggy. We had 48 port
       | switches that would randomly reboot, for example.
       | 
       | They can be a decent solution for SMB wifi, but that's as far as
       | I would go. Nothing mission-critical unless you are willing to
       | make compromises you wouldn't have to with a bigger vendor.
        
         | oehtXRwMkIs wrote:
         | Are there any 48 port switches you would recommend? I've
         | concluded that they're overpriced compared to multiple 24 port
         | switches for example but I'm hoping I'm wrong. Never heard of
         | Meraki for example.
        
           | vetinari wrote:
           | Meraki is a Cisco brand. It's most important feature is, that
           | once you buy into it, you are going to pay yearly license
           | fee.
        
         | rconti wrote:
         | My Meraki APs were replaced with Ubiquiti (MR32 -> AP AC Pro)
         | and holy god what a difference. The Merakis just had absolutely
         | AWFUL range. I tried everything I could for years, and they
         | were just terrible.
        
       | comboy wrote:
       | Argh, why do I learn about this from HN when they pretty much
       | force me through the cloud login with UDM-Pro. Nothing in the
       | dashboard. Also I think http://unifi/ is crap from a security
       | standpoint. Their threat management also seems to be just some
       | kind of a bad joke.They could for example do a nice hardware
       | based honeypot that you have to untrigger with physical access.
       | They could offer so much more for prosumers providing sane
       | defaults for a common case of having multitude of devices at your
       | home which can be categorized as intruder but expect to be on the
       | same network as your phone.
       | 
       | Is there a better alternative? When I tested multiple routers
       | mostly regarding low latency, network stability and reliability a
       | few years ago nothing came close, especially when having multiple
       | access points.
        
         | second--shift wrote:
         | Another endorsement for mikrotik here...spent a lot of time in
         | the WISP space and doing CPE installations. Mikrotik all the
         | way down - text config files (version control), ssh-like remote
         | terminals on all endpoints, full feature-set on even the most
         | basic hardware. I've taken them into other jobs and other
         | engineers have been happy with them.
         | 
         | The cons are that everything has one or more "mikrotik" way of
         | doing things, and it may not be intuitive to the new user.
         | Also, although everything is included, you have to set it all
         | up yourself.
        
         | fivesixzero wrote:
         | I've become a big fan of MikroTik routers and 10G/SFP+
         | router/switch hardware in the last few years. Their web UI and
         | SSH console are a bit quirky but the performance is pretty
         | great for the price.
         | 
         | My primary use case for their gear at home was to have a router
         | that can handle a LACP WAN bond for my fancy cable modem as
         | well as connecting to a 10G Ethernet switch via copper or
         | direct-attached SFP+ to a CRS-305 10G switch. Their RB-4011 was
         | a perfect fit, without any of the Ubiquiti SSO/controller stuff
         | to worry about.
         | 
         | I haven't explored their WiFi products yet (still using an old
         | router as an AP) but their product range is pretty broad. Might
         | look into it this year though.
        
           | aborsy wrote:
           | Does it support Wireguard?
           | 
           | Also RouterOS does not seem open source.
        
             | fivesixzero wrote:
             | Sadly RouterOS isn't open source. They've received a bit of
             | flak for their "available on request" stance on getting GPL
             | sources too. The fact that their GPL patches aren't readily
             | available is pretty uncool.
             | 
             | WireGuard isn't supported on RouterOS 6, which is the
             | current stable version, afaik. RouterOS 7 (currently
             | available in beta) did support for WG in August though, as
             | part of 7.1beta2 [1].
             | 
             | [1] https://mikrotik.com/download/changelogs/development-
             | release...
        
             | vetrom wrote:
             | RouterOS is not, but Mikrotik added wireguard support to
             | their firmware sometime in mid-late 2020. IDK if its out of
             | beta yet.
        
               | carlhjerpe wrote:
               | No, still very shitty beta sadly. In mikrotik communities
               | routeros7 is a meme (it'll never arrive). Even though its
               | here, its not.
        
             | pilsetnieks wrote:
             | V7 supports Wireguard and UDP OVPN, it's in beta but
             | reasonably stable, at least for home use.
        
           | ahepp wrote:
           | Do you know how ubiquiti's "edge" line compares to mikrotik?
        
             | gh02t wrote:
             | Having owned several products from both, Mikrotik
             | equivalents are generally way more feature packed but I
             | find them hard to use. EdgeMax stuff is more polished, but
             | has fewer features. Performance is comparable.
        
             | Lammy wrote:
             | I'm a Mikrotik user, not a Ubiquiti user, but looks like
             | the closest match would be Mikrotik's CRS (Cloud Router
             | Switch) line. My home network is a CRS317-1G-16S+RM at the
             | core and three CRS305-1G-4S+IN (one in each room), all
             | running SwitchOS/SwOS instead of the stock RouterOS (they
             | dual-boot, your choice), and I am very happy with them.
        
               | ethanpil wrote:
               | What APs do you use with a MicroTik setup?
        
         | mesh wrote:
         | Just for reference, I did receive an email from them.
        
           | cptskippy wrote:
           | I received one as well approximately an hour ago.
        
             | killion wrote:
             | I still haven't received one, I'll update this comment if I
             | do.
        
               | novaleaf wrote:
               | i haven't got an email yet either
        
         | linsomniac wrote:
         | I'm in the process of replacing my home Ubiquiti
         | infrastructure. Here's what I've decided on:
         | 
         | Replace the US-24-250W PoE switch with an Aruba Networks
         | S2500-24P (gigabit and PoE, 4x 10gig ports, quiet).
         | 
         | Replace the Cloud Key Gen 2 with BlueIris for camera
         | controller. I expect this will be able to connect to the
         | existing Ubiquiti cameras.
         | 
         | Possibly add one or more Ruckus R610 APs running in "Unleashed"
         | mode to augment my Google WiFi. I'm happy with the Google WiFi,
         | and in particular it has good tools for managing kids access to
         | WiFi. But the Ruckus APs are quite good and so I may move
         | parent and IoT access over to Ruckus, separate out IoT devices
         | to their own network.
         | 
         | This is the end of phase 1. Then I plan to go on to:
         | 
         | Add an OPN-Sense router. Currently not using Ubiquiti for
         | routing, the Google WiFi is our main router. Would like to gain
         | additional capabilities like insight into what the kids are
         | doing.
         | 
         | Replace the Ubiquiti Dome G3 with one of the less expensive 4K
         | cameras if they seem to provide similar or better
         | functionality. Also trying out the Wyse Cam v3, which seems ok
         | and the price sure is right, but is more of an augment camera
         | than a main camera, I prefer wired and PoE.
         | 
         | I've been doing some research and those are the options that
         | seem attractive. In particular, going with old enterprise gear
         | looks to be a huge win. You do lose that handy "single pane of
         | glass" management. But considering the problems I'm having with
         | Ubiquiti, and the upgrades I've already done to try to get past
         | them, with only some success, I can't bring myself to go
         | further in on Ubiquiti.
        
           | Johnny555 wrote:
           | The reason most people go with Ubiquiti for home use is the
           | price -- that Aruba switch costs $3500 new. The costs about
           | 1/10th that at $399.
           | 
           | Can you get free firmware updates from Aruba or do you need a
           | support contract?
        
         | napkin wrote:
         | Fitlet2 looks rather nice to me. Outfitted with an Intel J3455
         | CPU, and 2-4 Intel NICs, it is really power efficient for its
         | performance class (idles at ~6 watts, for those that care).
         | There are also some Chinese companies producing slightly
         | cheaper boxes in this category- Qotom, Kettop, Protectli.
         | 
         | When it comes to software, I'm a bit conflicted. I like
         | pfsense, but Netgate has gone a bit sour with the FLOSS
         | community. I'd also consider OpenWRT, FreeBSD, OpenBSD.
        
         | dont__panic wrote:
         | Did you happen to write up the results of your router tests?
         | I'd be really interested in reading up on them! I recently
         | picked up an old Apple Airport Extreme so I could easily set up
         | Time Machine backups on my network, but obviously Airports have
         | their own host of issues so I'd be really interested in
         | upgrading soon.
        
           | comboy wrote:
           | I don't, but it was a narrow case. Part of my home-made home
           | automation runs on wifi so I was focusing on low latency and
           | no packets lost when using wifi in my specific building. Top
           | of the shelf routers all had some occasional hiccups. I think
           | the good old WRT54GL did much better than them. Plus it was
           | done with the set of wifi receivers available to me at the
           | time (mostly cheapos connected to rpis & esp8266).
           | 
           | This is not a common use case, I was not interested in high
           | bandwidth. I did try to disable beamforming and all other
           | fireworks when testing though (but did tests with default
           | settings too)
        
           | ballenf wrote:
           | A second-hand Mac mini is an alternative that I've used for
           | network Time Machine backup targets. Can also turn on caching
           | iCloud/App Store/system updates for your home, if bandwidth
           | is metered and/or slower than your local speeds.
        
         | ViViDboarder wrote:
         | I turned off cloud login a while back. There's a toggle in the
         | settings for this.
        
           | imposterr wrote:
           | I was confused by the parent comment too. Aside from the
           | remote management features, if you turn off cloud login you
           | still get everything else. Maybe it's something specific to
           | the USG Pro? I've only used the smaller USG.
        
             | altano wrote:
             | I recently invested in UniFi hardware with the UDM Pro and
             | this isn't correct. UniFi Protect (the video security line)
             | requires remote access and Ubiquiti Cloud accounts or it
             | will break in a million weird ways. If you disable cloud
             | login you cannot reasonably use UniFi Protect.
        
             | comboy wrote:
             | Not USG but UDM-PRO. It was the first device from them that
             | required me to make an ubiquiti account to set it up.
        
             | _jal wrote:
             | It does look like newer systems require ui.com
             | login/integration.
             | 
             | Which means I'll be replacing mine, they're delusional if
             | they think this is OK. It is hard enough keeping a secure
             | network without the vendor intentionally backdooring it.
        
         | p0p0bawa wrote:
         | I run a Netgate SG-5100 (PF-Sense) as the main router, the
         | Unifi controller and Access points are al behind the Firewall.
         | The AP and switches are really good, not the DPI/IPS/IDS
         | solution (those suck)
        
           | aborsy wrote:
           | Great router!
           | 
           | The only issue I have with Netgate is pricing!
        
             | SparkyMcUnicorn wrote:
             | Protectli is a pretty common alternative.
        
         | watsonkr wrote:
         | I'm running pfsense as my router and TP-Link access points. I
         | run their controller in a container locally and everything
         | works great together. Super happy.
         | 
         | I think for some use cases this setup could be a nice
         | alternative (and cheaper) to ubiquiti.
        
         | hendersoon wrote:
         | Ubiquiti let users disable the cloud logins with UDM Pro, after
         | a pretty big backlash on their forums.
         | 
         | You do need a Ubiquiti account to setup the hardware in the
         | first place, but you can turn off cloud access and login
         | locally after that. And you should.
        
           | frisco wrote:
           | How? I have been looking for this setting but haven't been
           | able to find it.
        
         | pimeys wrote:
         | Just ordered a Chinese box with 8th gen U-series i5, 8 GB of
         | RAM and 120 GB of SSD. Has six ethernet connections, HDMI and
         | COM. Planning to install OpenWRT to it, and with AES-NI the
         | system should be easily able to push the full 1 Gbps of traffic
         | through Wireguard.
         | 
         | I've had whatever routers before, but mostly when using some
         | VPN to hide the traffic from your home network, and if having
         | fast enough internet, a good CPU is a must.
        
           | unethical_ban wrote:
           | Link to the box you got? That sounds interesting.
        
             | dpzmick wrote:
             | similar boxes are on amazon, with worse(ish) specs under
             | the brand "Protectli "
        
             | AndrewDavis wrote:
             | Also curious, and wondering how much that cost.
        
             | xvf22 wrote:
             | $350ish search AliExpress for "i5 7200U firewall"
        
             | pimeys wrote:
             | Oh, sorry!
             | 
             | These are available from Europe, but I've heard good things
             | from US about similar boxes. Not the same brand, but
             | similar hardware.
             | 
             | https://www.amazon.de/gp/product/B08JHKZMTN/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b
             | _...
             | 
             | Let's see how it works, but I expect it to be much faster
             | than my current ARMv7 box. Of course if you have space for
             | a rack, go with something actively cooled. In our
             | apartment, we expect the router to not make any noise.
        
               | pilsetnieks wrote:
               | Despite the name in the Amazon listing, it has nothing to
               | do with Mikrotik; also a 1Gbit ARM Mikrotik
               | router/firewall can be had for considerably less.
        
               | pimeys wrote:
               | How fast are the ARM CPU they have in their routers, do
               | they support AES-NI and how much data you can push with
               | VPN encryption through their boxes?
               | 
               | The current ARMv7 I have goes to about 100 degrees
               | Celsius and loads in the level of 4 to 6 when downloading
               | a bunch of data full speed.
        
           | searchableguy wrote:
           | Raspberry pi 4 compute module is great for building your own
           | router. You can attach a pcie network extension. All of that
           | would cost around $80. Flash one of the router firmware built
           | for pi such as openwrt or pfsense.
           | 
           | https://www.raspberrypi.org/products/compute-
           | module-4/?varia...
        
             | pimeys wrote:
             | It misses AES-NI though, so missing encryption hardware and
             | would be subpar if running a VPN client for the network...
        
             | tjohns wrote:
             | It's worth noting that the Unifi gateways have hardware
             | offload for traffic routing.
             | 
             | While a Raspberry Pi might work for some folks, it's worth
             | noting that these are two very different performance
             | classes.
        
             | aborsy wrote:
             | How is it great with one NIC?
             | 
             | Ethernet adapter and USB speeds seem less than ideal.
        
               | searchableguy wrote:
               | I don't need many ethernet port so it works for me. My
               | home network speed is less than a gigabit.
               | 
               | It's definitely not for people like OP but may work for
               | other people who don't want to pay much and still have a
               | something decent that they can hack themselves.
        
               | jsight wrote:
               | A Pi 4 can handle about 1 Gb without issue. It is a great
               | option for consumer workloads at consumer prices. I've
               | certainly seen far worse consumer gear.
        
           | comboy wrote:
           | I still put the important part of my network behind my own
           | router similar to yours (and in terms of security I think
           | ubuntu server + whatever you need has likely much smaller
           | attack surface than OpenWRT which is a piece of software just
           | too tasty not to be exploited).
           | 
           | Outside that, wifi part is hard to get right and smart
           | switches are nice to have, but they are PITA if the firmware
           | is never updated and there's no single place to nicely manage
           | it all.
        
             | pimeys wrote:
             | I'm having already Unifi's AP's, the controller running in
             | my NAS and a good switch for the current setup.
             | 
             | Do you have some better suggestions for the router
             | software? I'd love to run Opnsense, but a native Wireguard
             | client is a must, and so is a good web interface for the
             | setup.
        
           | waynesonfire wrote:
           | i've got this on my todo list of projects. looks super
           | interesting. there seem to be a lot of flavors of these boxes
           | and i'm having a difficult time figuring which one will work
           | best. i don't know anything about the manufacturers.
        
           | centimeter wrote:
           | FWIW, I tried using OpenWRT on a box with similar specs to
           | yours and it was a nightmare. Ended up using FreeBSD instead
           | and it was a vastly better experience. I think OpenWRT might
           | only be worth it on very low-spec hardware.
        
             | pimeys wrote:
             | Hey! Could you please share what you think didn't work so
             | well with OpenWRT? I'm currently running a Turris Omnia
             | with their custom OpenWRT that I know how to use and it's
             | been working quite well. What's missing is a better CPU to
             | run the Wireguard encryption full speed through our fast
             | internet connection.
             | 
             | I'm seriously thinking about pfSense or Opnsense, but
             | FreeBSD still misses native Wireguard support, leaving the
             | encryption to the go implementation, which is subpar for
             | our use cases. But, I'd be happy to run Opnsense, with
             | jails and all those goodies from FreeBSD.
        
         | petrohi wrote:
         | Have you tried MikroTik gear?
        
       | ex_ubiquiti wrote:
       | As a former Ubiquiti employee, I'm sad to watch the slow decline
       | of the company. There was a steady exodus of engineering talent
       | through 2020. The CEO was focused on moving to countries where
       | engineering was cheaper and employees complained less about
       | constant crunch mode. If you search around, you can find
       | interviews where he brags about closing the San Jose office
       | because he thought everyone there was too entitled.
       | 
       | The saddest part is that we had many good engineers who could
       | have continued to do amazing things with the UniFi momentum. So
       | much time was wasted on dead end products like FrontRow. Most
       | everyone I know left for jobs where we were treated better and
       | paid more.
        
       | omni wrote:
       | Does anyone have a better link for this, preferably one hosted on
       | Ubiquiti's own site somewhere?
        
         | reillychase wrote:
         | The newsletter looks suspicious but I confirmed with a Ubiquiti
         | employee that it is legit
        
           | DetroitThrow wrote:
           | Not that I distrust you or am asking you to make a change,
           | but it would help if they were to at least post the mailchimp
           | link on their social media.
        
             | enzanki_ars wrote:
             | They have an official thread/announcement on their
             | community forum:
             | https://community.ui.com/questions/Account-
             | Notification/9646...
        
               | DetroitThrow wrote:
               | Thank you!
               | 
               | @dang, the forum post is more appropriate here than the
               | mailchimp link - it's source is unambiguously from UI.
        
           | unethical_ban wrote:
           | I mean, it's hardly a phish. It doesn't try to directly link
           | to an action page, and the requested actions are somewhere
           | between "FYI" and "Hey, change your password and strengthen
           | your security".
        
         | bardworx wrote:
         | I received an email from Ubiquiti that is 1:1 to this post. It
         | did not provide a link to a statement on their website but can
         | confirm its real.
         | 
         | I can post a screenshot or something if necessary.
        
         | enzanki_ars wrote:
         | They have an official thread/announcement on their community
         | forum: https://community.ui.com/questions/Account-
         | Notification/9646...
        
         | u678u wrote:
         | https://community.ui.com/questions/Account-Notification/9646...
         | isn't much.
        
         | Belphemur wrote:
         | They didn't do a press release yet for it.
         | 
         | This is the email users directly received.
        
         | zkms wrote:
         | For what it's worth i can attest to receiving such an email
         | from ubiquiti about 40 minutes ago.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | dustinmoris wrote:
       | Ubiquiti had a data breach, but what could hackers possibly want
       | to know which we didn't know already? All their customers are
       | overpaid engineers who got sucked into dumb influencer marketing
       | convincing them to buy overpriced industrial grade networking kit
       | for their 50m2 flat. </sarcasm>
        
         | weehoo wrote:
         | Ehh they make great products for smb/coliving/coworking spaces,
         | where you need better hardware than the box the ISP gives you
         | but you don't need the kitchen sink that comes with Cisco.
         | Simple enough that a slight savvy frat bro or small business
         | owner can set it up in an afternoon and have seamless handoff
         | across a large space with several access points and PoE.
        
           | cyberpunk wrote:
           | Or if you live in a four story house with half a meter of
           | concrete between every floor...
           | 
           | I'm really happy with my UniFi kit..
        
           | dustinmoris wrote:
           | Ubiquiti is amazing for your home. You can cycle 50km on your
           | Peleton and still get excellent WiFi signal. Which other
           | router can deliver such outstanding performance!
        
         | seattle_spring wrote:
         | While I would choose a less abrasive way of stating it, I agree
         | with your underlying assessment. At the recommendation of
         | basically every networking forum and subreddit, I bought some
         | Ubiquiti stuff to power networking and wifi for a new place I
         | recently moved into. It cost 3x what a mid to high-end Linksys
         | would have cost, and as far as I can tell provides literally
         | negative benefit for my purpose:
         | 
         | Specifically, rather than a single box and an easy interface, I
         | now have 3 devices that all require their own power bricks,
         | connected via Ethernet cables, and a UI that required reading
         | all sorts of documents and tutorials just to mimic the
         | functionality of my last consumer-grade router. Not to mention
         | the wifi coverage isn't even as good as my old router, even
         | when adjusting a bunch of settings from default based on said
         | tutorials.
         | 
         | I'm not saying that this hardware isn't worth it for some
         | people, but for anyone who uses it for regular streaming and
         | remote working, it's completely not worth the expense, hassle,
         | and inconvenient form factor.
        
           | causalmodels wrote:
           | I'm sure their fancier equipment is probably a nightmare of a
           | time sink but the little kits you can buy are dead simple for
           | nontechnical people to set up and use. My parents have
           | plaster walls and the modem lives in the basement so they
           | have huge problems with coverage even though their house
           | isn't very big. This is sort of silly but they connection
           | speed gage on their router is super helpful because they get
           | confused with things like checking internet speed.
        
       | turblety wrote:
       | That link looks awful on a mobile browser. Isn't MailChimp
       | supposed to make responsive emails easy.
       | 
       | It's so bad, they have disabled pinch to zoom, so I just
       | horizontally scroll.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-01-11 22:00 UTC)