Users won't apply fixes.
Therefore auto-updates became the norm.
You can trust the users implicitly, or you can trust ASUS implicitly.
It seems that the appropriate place to deal with network traffic security issues is with the network bandwidth provider, which would be your ISP.
This would imply that the ISP has abilities to interpose between malicious traffic and the user that, with modern technologies like DNS-over-HTTP, they simply don’t have. To most ISPs (that don’t force you to install MITM CA certs), user traffic is increasingly a black box. Which means that attacker traffic can blend right in as part of said black box. The only thing that can see into the black box is the device on the end of the line.
It's not about catching related traffic when it occurs, more managing the immediate implications from insecure devices on the network. The ISP can see the device, it doesn't need to inspect the traffic.
Have we all forgotten how Nest thermostats turned off the heat in the middle of January 2016 because of a botched software update? (Probably. It was hard to get Google to surface a link without a date due to so much SEO bullshit).
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/14/fashion/nest-thermostat-g...
(Though replacing a smart thermostat with a mercury switch one is a five minute job if you're comfortable with it.)
At least in this case, ASUS routers all have local firmware install functionality, so this particular case is certainly not an example of engineers not knowing it’s possible to write offline updates.
Now if you’re really lamenting the lack of computing devices that cannot be updated remotely by design, that’s a different story, and might be on a ship that sailed a while back. The problem there is that local updates are inconvenient enough for most people that they aren’t done, which is problematic from support and security perspectives, even though there are legit problems with remote updates too…
Google no longer does search, it does "recommendation" and it sucks hard.
Now get off my lawn ))
The scary part of auto update is when a company does a bad job of it. For example: letting the auto update site domain expire or point to an IP at a hosting provider that someone might pick up and if the devices don't do proper endpoint validation folks can use it to force downloads of compromised images.
All of these things have happened.
Depends.
"Homemade" routers running open source OS that user can compile themselves need not "phone home" against computer owner intent. "Home" is the owner, not some company.
Commercial routers running closed source OS that owner cannot edit and re-compile can be expected to try to phone home for something, IMHO. A disturbing trend certainly not started by ASUS but which seems to be infecting most hardware sold with pre-installed closed source OS.
I know I would prefer something like that for my non-savvy people. Considering there are smart light bulbs with vulnerabilities which are years away from the landfill. The only question is which botnet will they join the next time they power cycle.
May be i am old fashioned but shouldn't hardware appliances be designed as standalone devices that have minimal external dependencies.
If there was no firmware update or patch applied -- the functionality of the device shouldn't change.
Do all routers these days "phone home" anyway and modify settings on autopilot? Even if user has chosen to turn off updates?