Does ignoring suspicious activity on port 32764 for 11 (ELEVEN) years, and then hiding it instead of closing it sound familiar to you? If not, it might be interesting to read up on it. Granted, others were also bitten by that SerComm backdoor. Still, only Netgear has (to my knowledge anyway) had reports on it on their forums but chose to ignore them.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140424094025/http://www.netgear-forum.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=61... This ties in with the subject in so far that failing to disclose even the most trivial bits of information doesn't create additional trust. Maybe it's laundry talk to you, and maybe it really is, but let's just say I continue to not be impressed. I don't suppose you truly do need me to explain to you the difference between an internet router and an internal switch, security-wise, yes? Given that the switch also does allow turning off the (now deprecated) management protocol, it should be as secure as a web-administered switch gets (assuming one is using https and restricts management to certain ports). Yes, Network pros usually have support contracts, indeed. And they indeed use Cisco, or maybe HP (formerly 3Com), at least where I have had the opportunity of talking to them. Thus, obviously, they would not bother with low-level maintenance unless it's ancient equipment. Which the GS is not, meaning that I am not a networking pro, nor do I consider myself one (in case you were trying to imply that I did). So, maybe that is the reason why I am not seeing the rationale behind not sharing this info? Would there be additional legal issues Netgear would have to face if they did tell? I know that some court rulings tend to be, mildly spoken, "quite interesting", so maybe that is a problem? Anyway, the function of the IAE JJ will be immediately apparent upon seeing it's surrounding configuration on the actual PCB if you know your way around electronics - and from what you write, you may be well ahead of me.
🙂 So there's no need to worry. OK, OK, not telling is childish, so here goes: it's one of the two switching regulators, namely the one providing the 3.3V for the external I/Os of CPU and PHYs. And, sadly, it's not the source of my problems, as that voltage is stable. The other voltage is the problematic one: the one coming from U11, named "ABF J08 375". Still, that regulator itself is not necessarily faulty since 1.2V are common and the voltage looks reasonable, except for the aforementioned periodic drops. Normally, I wouldn't consider 100mV drop to be an issue, but with only 1.2V to begin, that is nearly a 10% drop. And then there is the issue that 1.8V is another common voltage for that exact purpose, so there are two things that I cannot know, but Netgear could easily tell. Maybe you can see where my frustration comes from?
