BambuLab basically locks down their entire 3D printer ecosystem with this ridiculous cloud authorization system.
You want to print locally via your LAN? Sorry, the cloud needs to authorize your g-code first.
Want to use another slicer to send your job to the printer? Sorry, no.
Would it really still surprise anyone if DRM'd filaments are next on their agenda? Their printers are good, their prices are cheap, but please, stop supporting this company.
https://blog.bambulab.com/firmware-update-introducing-new-authorization-control-system-2/
@fribbledom@mastodon.social that's not true, you still can use other Slicers as described in the linked article, you just need an additional piece of software to sign your requests, to make sure that the printer cannot be used from unauthorized users
@kitsune_yasu I didn't claim otherwise. But let's not pretend this has anything to do with security.
Want to use another slicer to send your job to the printer? Sorry, no.I'd argue that this part is quite misleading.
let's not pretend this has anything to do with securityWell, if you want to make sure, that only authorized people can use the printer, than you need to add an authentication layer into the current protocol.
This system also prevents people, that can access your WLAN, to manipulate your printer as long as they don't have authorization to use it.
There would have been a multitude of ways to actually improve their security:
an Oauth API, API tokens, token/PIN exchange on the printer's display and/or a QR-code, an actual LAN-only mode, manual certificate exchange, ... I'll stop here.
All of these solutions would be absolutely feasible, actually secure, and would not lock you out from using a third-party slicer. Their solution isn't about security at all, it's only about controlling their ecosystem.
@fribbledom@mastodon.social This would still require you to have an additional piece of software that allows the authentication on top of the default protocol.
I agree that there should be an open solution for others in the long run.
Yes, but that's a solution that slicers can simply adopt and implement. Like they do for dozens of other protocols and auth mechanisms.
@fribbledom@mastodon.social Yes, but read the article.
THIS IS A BETA
The app is only there, so maintainers of slicers don't need to implement an Auth-System, as long as it is in an experimental phase.
When the entire architecture and design of their security mechanism is flawed an update won't help them.
The only thing they can reasonably do is to move the signing process to their cloud service.
Which, again, would be hilariously stupid.