The day my smart vacuum turned against me

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Evidence and technical ambiguity

  • Several commenters say the post is too vague to reproduce: missing hostnames, firmware version, exact file changes, and network traces.
  • The key log line (RS_CTRL_REMOTE_EVENT) is seen as ambiguous; without reverse‑engineering, it’s unclear if it reflects a “kill switch” or something mundane like app commands or IR remote events.
  • One commenter who loaded a related firmware into Ghidra suggests “remote control” may refer to IR or app control, not arbitrary remote code execution.
  • The author later adds an update:
    • The same “remote event” appears during normal app actions.
    • After firmware reset the vacuum works offline for ~2 days, uploads map data, receives a remote event, then bricks again.
    • Restoring backed‑up files unbricks it; bricking pattern repeats, now with a “not on flat surface” sensor error.
    • The author claims unblocking network access alone does not revive it; reflashing/restoring is required.

Was there really a “kill switch”?

  • Some see the behavior as clear evidence of a remote disable mechanism tied to telemetry or cloud control.
  • Others argue a simpler explanation: device self‑bricks after repeated failed cloud contact, or hits a logging/firmware bug; no need to assume punitive intent.
  • Multiple commenters stress the business irrationality of deliberately disabling products and then paying for repeated warranty RMAs.
  • There is debate over whether the disabling is triggered manually by support, automatically by the cloud, or locally by the device; commenters agree this remains unresolved.

Broader worries about smart devices

  • Many extrapolate to general IoT risks: remote control of home appliances, data harvesting, and even nation‑state attacks on consumer infrastructure.
  • Others counter that some “doom” scenarios are implausible compared to more prosaic security issues.

User coping strategies and alternatives

  • Several refuse to connect vacuums and other appliances to Wi‑Fi, but note this often sacrifices mapping and zoning features.
  • Complaints that many devices only work via vendor clouds and sometimes even share Wi‑Fi credentials in opaque ways; others dismiss some of these theories as “tinfoil hat.”
  • Valetudo is discussed as a popular “declouding” solution that replaces the cloud API locally while reusing vendor firmware, with good reports and Home Assistant integration.

Legal and ethical reactions

  • Some call for laws making intentional remote bricking illegal and requiring refunds when advertised functionality is disabled remotely.
  • Others note that remote update/control channels are now routine (and sometimes mandated), but agree devices that refuse to operate offline cross a line.

Meta: AI‑assisted writing

  • Multiple readers find the blog’s dramatic tone and stylistic tics “AI‑like” and off‑putting.
  • The author confirms using LLMs to polish the text but insists the events and technical content are genuine, though some remain skeptical.