So, you want to manually download an update, install it and brick your device on your own schedule?

Now you're just taking a silly defensive position by trivializing what I said using stupid rhetoric... I prefer to be in control over updates for network equipment, even the router in my home, reviewing changes and feedback, and to be "on the ready" in case the update does not work. I leave automatic updates for things like browsers.

Sounds like a lot of work for something that should happen frequently and normally not cause any problems.

It's actually not too bad in my case. All in all not that many minutes of pre-emptive effort even across a whole year. The hassle of a surprise Internet outage and having to find what/where the problem is would cost me more.

As opposed to the device automatically downloading an update, installing, and bricking my device? Yes, because I can plan for it if things go wrong.

Depends a lot on the use case, though.

Yes. Bricking the network in the middle of a voip call, or meeting is unpleasant. Waking up to a broken network is also unpleasant, when I need to do my job, an instead have to go fixing some underdocummented mess of a gadget.

I (home user) like to delay updates that aren't reported as 'critical security updates' in order to allow others to brick their devices, then I can decide if the risk is worth it. Yes, manual control.

> So, you want to manually download an update, install it and brick your device on your own schedule?

Yes, because I can plan for it. I can do it on a weekend or a local holiday. I can do it in the evening after work, or in the morning so that I have the whole day to go out and buy a replacement. If it's not critical, it can wait until my vacation.

And even without any risk of bricking, it should still be done on my schedule. I don't want the connection to glitch while I'm in the middle of a live stream, or an online multiplayer game, or a call with a distant relative.

Let's assume the update is bad and (soft)bricks routers like yesterday's update. Is it better to be part of the auto-update pool of users (who definitely got their routers bricked), or be a manual updater?

Normal case: You lose some features / quality of life / stability improvements for a day / week / month (whenever you get around to updating it).

Best case is that you aren't in general population of bricked routers like everyone else today.

Worst case scenario is that you're late to a zero-day exploit. Although, the tech news cycle tends to report those stories pretty well, so you'd be aware of it.

The pros definitely outweight the cons in my opinion, especially on something critical like my internet access.

Okay, but these asus routers have also silently successfully updated themselves hundreds of times.

So against the one time you win by manually updating, you are weighing hundreds of times you had to research before clicking ‘update’ to see if there were any reports of this update bricking routers?

Because if you don’t do that, you just click the update button whenever you get round to it, you are running your router in a ‘vulnerable to zero days’ configuration, AND you’re going to brick your router the one time they ship an update that goes bad.

> When it comes to network equipment I would value control and security over that sort of convenience any day.

That's great for people who are into opsec as a hobby. But with the proverbial Aunt Millie I want auto-updates so they're patched.

Asus allows the option of having auto-updates enabled or disabled (forget which is the default).

I think automatic updates for a typical all-in-one home router is totally OK, and preferrable, for people who don't have the know-how to improve on it (because I'm not an opsec professional or hobbyist). It's unfortunate that these are also the people who face extended outage when something like this does go wrong. They can't fix it themselves, and the nephew that can might not be available for days.