Even with trusted brands, a malicious actor can attack the vendor. For example, one could order devices, tamper with them, and then send them back via returns. The vendor likely tests it a bit, and then repackages it and sells it as refurbished, or maybe even as a new one.
The fun thing is that the same is true with software. Looking at a source code is hard enough, even for experienced programmers, and then how do you verify a piece of software that you don't even have the source code to? And if you have the code, how do you verify that the software is made out of that code?
People basically just operate on trust, you can't verify much of the stuff. Just try to stick to entities with reputation, and hope for the best.
if you don't want to spend your entire life living in a faraday cage, there must be some level of trust.
I don't even think that most people need to think about this. It's enough that a few security minded people do, and that they end up pushing for good regulation. Similarly to food safety, we then end up in a system where you can go to most places and expect to not get food poisoning.
For Anker in particular, sadly there may be a reason _not_ to trust them. See the recent Anker-owned Eufy cloud camera scandel
The US government rerouted CISCO routers to a factory that tampered with them before sending them to their final destinations. There's no reason to believe this stopped or isn't still being done in similar ways. It doesn't have to be a USB-C dock, it could be anything.
These attacks are not easy or cheap, and by their very nature need to be deployed in small % of total installs (as every use increases the likelihood of discovery).
Criminal organizations interested in ransoming details might be interested in casting a wide net, but intelligence services less so.
No. Sentimental values aren't an objective measure.
>Are there good reasons to believe that the brand name that's printed on the case means it's actually made by that company?
No. Most companies don't manufacture their products, in fact.
>How could anyone determine if it contains a keylogger, or an HDMI screen grabber, or a network sniffer, or a reverse shell, or a rootkit installer?
By having a sacrificial computer that tests every single piece of hardware and software before they are allowed access into your inner sanctum.
Even still, it could be intercepting & mitm'ing your devices. There are some potential advanced games here. But without also having a network device to exfiltrate out on, it seems pointless. As soon as you have USB networking the risk skyrockets though.
There are good reasons to believe Anker is not trustworthy [0].
[0]: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/11/eufys-no-clouds-came...
It's a solid niche IMO. I don't like buying devices that will effectively stop working if the manufacturer goes out of business or shuts down the services they're dependent upon. OTOH, there's generally a lot more effort required by the end user to get it working, so I completely understand why most manufacturers go with a service-mediated design.
I like to think people that know their trade (electronics, etc) can figure this out; the absence of proof of there being things like keyloggers in these docks is enough for me. Same with the distrust of ZTE devices, has there been any conclusive evidence that there actually IS espionage or remote controls in there, or is it fearmongering to protect the US / western market?
Are there good reasons to believe they're safe, that the brands are trustworthy?
Are there good reasons to believe that the brand name that's printed on the case means it's actually made by that company?
How could anyone determine if it contains a keylogger, or an HDMI screen grabber, or a network sniffer, or a reverse shell, or a rootkit installer?