Its probbly just
Your garden variety covert 'plugin' used by a govt agency to spy on users of those chargers, who may be planning to attack [insert country] with vibrators.
So they 'cannot' take it down under section bla bla bla...
The maker of Energizer brand batteries is continuing to serve its customers a file laced with a data-stealing trojan more than 24 hours after the company was notified of the threat and almost two weeks after it promised to fix the problem. A spokeswoman for Energizer Holdings acknowledged receiving a voicemail Wednesday night …
"More than half the time I call a reporter back, the story's already run," she told The Register on Thursday afternoon. "I find it a little odd that someone would call someone at 9:30 at night. That is not within normal business hours."
What a friggin slacker!
I rate this a fail, not for the article or the story, but that you have a PR spokeswoman (no-name) who is in the middle of a 'crisis' and rather than have her office phone forwarded to her mobile, she's off duty because its 'after hours'.
How many IT professionals have gotten a 2AM wake up call because there was a problem in production and a job failed to run properly. Of course if the IT professional doesn't fix the problem ASAP, nightly jobs don't run and the company is in deep she-it because it cant function.
When you work for a global company, its normal business hours somewhere... ;-)
Anyone affected in the UK might be wise to consider legal action under:
Sale and Supply of Goods and Services
Under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and The Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 traders must sell goods that are as described and of satisfactory quality, and provide services that are to a proper standard of workmanship
Google seems more friendlier than Bing on the above
I bet :
1. it never said that it would be free of viruses. (so it's as described)
2. the virus works (so it's satisfactory quality)
3. the software provides it's service regardless of the virus
The only thing you might get them on is "proper standard of workmanship" but after the number of similar problems, this is probably sufficiently within "established standards of workmanship" that you'd have a hard time making anything stick.
If there were a line in there about "must not provide significant unexpected detriment to the user/owner" then it might work.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020