this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2026
88 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

89409 readers
3901 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Psi9@kbin.earth 48 points 15 hours ago (5 children)

which once again begs the question. why the fuck is your freezer connected to the internet

[–] stickyprimer@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Really, this is worth just 5 minutes of research. This is not like the stupid Samsung fridge you keep in your home. In commercial settings you may have hundreds of refrigeration units to track and manage in order to keep food safe. And it’s quite plainly very efficient to do this with remote management software, and yes this can be deployed locally with a local server to manage everything but it can also be done over the internet to cloud services and that can be much more feasible for someone who is trying to run a grocery and isn’t a network engineer or experienced server administrator.

I know someone will just say come on, it’s not that hard. To which I say fine, but the question here was why would anyone ever do this. There is actually an answer.

[–] wuffah@lemmy.world 16 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

Supermarkets allow their freezers to connect to the internet so that maintenance and monitoring can occur remotely.

[–] LewdLemon@sh.itjust.works 18 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah. And VPN connections exist so maintenance and monitoring can take place without direct exposure. But alas...

[–] urushitan@kakera.kintsugi.moe 2 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Yeah but that’s expensive to set up and C-Suites need more bonuses so

[–] LewdLemon@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 hours ago

I know you're being sarcastic. But for anyone coming here with a damaged irony sensor: no. Setting up a VPN comes at zero software costs (it's all open source software, unless you're keen on getting ripped off by some proprietary product) and a reasonably low cost in man hours for setting it up (we're talking single-digit to low double-digit hours here).

[–] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 2 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Expensive? I bet it's less expensive than losing all your frozen inventory.

[–] luciferofastora@feddit.org 2 points 7 hours ago

Setup expenses look bad on the quarterly report. Losses later, if they happen at all (who knows if the engineers are so into their tools they forget the real world and I, the genius CEO, need to bring them back to reality), are problem for later.

[–] nieminen@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago

That requires forethought though, you're giving c-suites too much credit.

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 12 points 14 hours ago

Yeah, but you would think they would have gotten them off the Internet after the first time this happened, even if it means having to hire an extra person to keep an eye on them.

[–] disorderly@lemmy.world 10 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

Nit: it doesn't beg the question (a logical fallacy also known as tautology), it raises it.

But yeah, is it really that helpful to network something you only want to set one time?

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 5 points 14 hours ago

Actually, "beg the question" is a linguistic fossil from a time when "beg" didn't mean quite the same thing it does today.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

You want to monitor and perhaps automatically fix temp fluctuations? Maybe these things are smart enough to report parts about to fail? 🤷🏼‍♂️ But in any case it would be child's play to make these things bulletproof.

One example: Set the local firewall to block all WAN traffic, all ports, to the freezer group (VLAN) except where the origin packet is the monitoring IP. I suck at networking and could work this out in an afternoon. Give me a week and I'll have a deployment script for all the local firewalls, tested and ready to push the button. And again, I suck.

[–] disorderly@lemmy.world 8 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

You don't need an Internet connection to have a control system keep temperature around a setpoint, though. That's usually handled by a lower level circuit that will continue to operate in the case that the high level interface is not responding.

Observability is nice, but you don't need to expose controls to do this, you could just have a Prometheus endpoint.

I suspect it's because the manufacturer is trying to sell RaaS (refrigeration as a service) and to ensure they get their monthly dues, they "offer remote maintenance and monitoring" or something.

[–] njordomir@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago

I suspect your suspicion is accurate. Scanning with BLE or a flipper shows the coolers at my local grocery also. It's like the cars, they won't secure it until someone makes it and even then they'll secure it against their customers freedom, not hackers.

[–] Somecall_metim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 13 hours ago

Exactly! It should have a single non-internet connected computer per supermarket controlling the temps.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 3 points 13 hours ago

once again begs the question

Nope. Just raises it.