Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
IT

QNAP NAS Users Locked Out After Firmware Update Snafu (theregister.com) 46

A firmware update has left QNAP network-attached storage device owners unable to access their systems, with standard reset procedures failing to resolve the issue.

The problematic update, QTS 5.2.2.2950 build 20241114, was released last week before being partially withdrawn, according to user reports on QNAP's community forums. QNAP, the Taiwan-based storage manufacturer, has not specified which models are affected by the faulty firmware.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

QNAP NAS Users Locked Out After Firmware Update Snafu

Comments Filter:
  • Lucky, or maybe hardware dependent.
  • by NimbleSquirrel ( 587564 ) on Monday November 25, 2024 @02:37PM (#64971343)

    QNAP seem to have a history of pushing out bad firmware updates.

    After the Deadbolt ransomware, QNAP started enabling automatic updates by default. If you updated your firmware, QNAP enabled automatic updating regardless of whether you had it enabled or disabled prior. They didn't tell anyone. You just had to *know* that you needed to manually disable automatic updates each time you did an update. I do update my stuff, but I need to know an update is reliable before I go live with it. That is not much to ask.

    About three years ago QNAP pushed a dodgy update that failed and corrupted my RAID array. I wasn't the only one affected. Luckily I was able to recover most of my data. I ditched the QNAP OS pretty quickly after that. Luckily I was able to get Unraid up and running on the hardware, although the CPU was a little too under-powered for much more than that. I wouldn't touch QNAP again, even if they paid me.

    • I was lucky -- Deadbolt passed me by because I had firewalling enabled, blocking everything but incoming connections on the local subnet. That way, if QNAP's connection broker got something outside of the IP range, it wouldn't be allowed to touch the NAS. They finally got some sense and don't have that on by default, but a lot of people want to use their NAS on the Internet as a "hardware GDrive", so this was probably set as a default for people who didn't understand the difference between a NAS and a clo

  • Is it possible for the software engineers to design an update that can be rolled-back to the last good version in the event of the above?
    • by Anonymous Coward

      Of course it is but that would cost a few extra cents (storage for A/B images or similar), and shave 0.001% off profits, so that would be a hard "no" then.

      • by HiThere ( 15173 )

        It would also consume a bit of memory, since you need to keep a duplicate copy of the unupgraded system around. Switching to the older one would be easy, but keeping the older one around eats memory. (Sometimes it's done anyway, of course. See "recovery partition".)

        • > since you need to keep a duplicate copy of the unupgraded system around

          No really. all you need to do is create an archive of any system files the upgrade replaces. One time, I remember using a utility that recorder the steps in a standard installer to create an unattended installer. It would have been trivial to add the roll-back facility.
      • Other commenters say their OS code is stored on customer disks.

        Reflexively anticapitalist sentiment may not apply.

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Possible? Yes. Did they do it? No.

    • Absolutely not because Qnap is not a commercial company and has never made a firmware chip in there life.
      It's just a junk raid backup device with no brains.

    • here's the story I tell everyone in embedded, who is new to the field.

      you want 3 boot partitions. 2 for flash and 1 for ROM.

      your update toggles between partA and partB. you cant write to partC, its minimal and in rom. its there in case both A and B are not bootable (watchdog based).

      I worked at a company that made radios that were for ISP's to use, tower to tower. a tower climb can cost $10k. you do NOT want to have to hire someone just to reboot or fix bad firmware. we learned that the cost of 3 parti

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Quality Not APplicable

  • by Anonymous Cward ( 10374574 ) on Monday November 25, 2024 @03:41PM (#64971565)
    Boot it without the disks in, use Qfinder to enable SSH, connect with default credentials (serial number as password) and then hotplug your disks. From there, everything is mountable and accessible to modify.
    • Non trivial with hardware using NVME SSDs. Guess it will be time to retire one of my older appliances.

    • I hadn't yet thought of hotplugging NVME drives. Well, another wrinkle to consider in my own NAS upgrade project.

  • by KeithH ( 15061 ) on Monday November 25, 2024 @07:22PM (#64972199)

    OP writes "The problematic update, QTS 5.2.2.2950 build 20241114, was released last week before being partially withdrawn " (my emphasis) but according to QNAP, the fixed version has the SAME BUILD IDENTIFIER:

    "In response, QNAP promptly withdrew the operating system update, conducted a comprehensive investigation, and re-released a stable version of QTS 5.2.2.2950 build 20241114 within 24 hours."

    For the love of all that is good and proper, you don't re-use a build number!

    The release notes for this build [qnap.com] make no mention of the latest fix. This is sloppy sloppy sloppy release management. It may not be as globally disastrous as CrowdStrike but it demonstrates just as much negligence on the part of the vendor.

    I'm waiting for the next release and am going to let it soak out in the wild before I apply it.

    • by Kokuyo ( 549451 )

      Look at it from the bright side: They don't hide the fact that they are selling garbage.

      Not through any honesty on their part I just think their incompetence is all-encompassing :D.

Hackers are just a migratory lifeform with a tropism for computers.

Working...