Is this why there’s no stock?
Ubiquiti: The U.S. Tech Enabling Russia's Drone War
Submitted 17 hours ago by Beep@lemmus.org to technology@lemmy.world
Comments
CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 16 hours ago
mal3oon@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
I read the same about the OPi 5+. Apparently it used the Rockchip RK3588 which has a decent NPU for self controlled drones, so russia bought most of the stock. Their price went from ~150$ to infinite in a month.
Buelldozer@lemmy.today 12 hours ago
Nah, according to the article this is mostly the WISP type stuff, particularly the Power and Nano beam products meant for Long Range Point to Point / Multi Point connections. This isn’t routers / switches / etc.
Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 3 hours ago
Ubiquiti makes fucking trash.
I bought one of their more expensive switches recently, and you can’t mirror more than one port to another port. Also, only half the ports can be mirrored.
They are expensive toys for people who want EZ (basic) networking setups.
chronicledmonocle@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
Do their switches still stop forwarding traffic when you make changes for 10-30 seconds?
letsgo2themall@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
yeah are there any big tech companies that aren’t full of authoritarian shit bags?
Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 3 hours ago
I’ve not heard bad things about Mikrotik yet.
LadyMeow@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 hours ago
Increasingly, seems like no. :(
CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 15 hours ago
Line go up.
homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
What the fuck
just_another_person@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
Interesting if true…
Raptor_007@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
Please no….
pewgar_seemsimandroid@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 hours ago
here before .ml
Buelldozer@lemmy.today 12 hours ago
Oh look, a hit piece put out by a media company that’s owned by a capital investment group that is shorting UIs stock…I wonder what this could be about?!
Ubi isn’t selling this stuff to the Russians and neither are their vendors. Their vendors, most of them in the article are from overseas, are selling them to middle-men who sell them to another middle-man who then physically gets the equipment into Russian hands where it potentially goes through ANOTHER middle man before its used by Russian troops. There’s almost no way to control that and if you read carefully the “legal experts” quoted toward the bottom of the article use some very careful language.
You can’t just “shut it down” either, although even the article notes that Ubi is trying. Most of the gear that’s getting into Russian military hands for use in the war is stuff that you have probably never used. It’s PowerBeam and NanoBeam product that’s most often used by WISPs, which makes sense because that’s precisely how Russian forces are using it. What the article isn’t telling you is that this stuff does NOT need hooked to the Cloud in order to function. In fact it doesn’t need Internet access at all and so there’s no way for Ubi to know where it’s being used or even that it’s been powered up!
Even if Ubi can tell that the equipment is powered on and in use they may not know where it’s at with sufficient accuracy or knowledge to do anything about it. The damn thing could be on the Internet via Starlink sitting in Pokrovsk. On December 1st, 2025 was a SL system with Ubi gear attached to it in Pokrovsk being operated by Russia or Ukraine? There’s literally no way for Ubi or anyone else to know.
As for Ubi doing more if you read the whole article you’ll find that more than a few of these bad distributors HAVE been caught and shut down across the globe which almost certainly means that Ubi is helping at some level.
In short the article looks bad but when you start breaking down the individual points it quickly falls apart, especially when the media company behind it has a monetary interest in sinking Ubiquiti’s stock.
Rekall_Incorporated@piefed.social 5 hours ago
That’s not really true. If they wanted to, they could massively decrease the level of shipments that reach the russians. It’s not a priority for Ubiquiti.
It’s like with money laundering, it’s very difficult to control (I am talking in a general sense). Yet you’ll find that enabling money laundering for drug cartels is treated relatively seriously by major western financial institutions.
gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 4 hours ago
That’s… difficult in practice. Especially since the people involved in trying to circumvent sanctions and get this sort of shit to the Russians don’t just order things directly. In the interest of confusing and delaying legal repercussions for anyone involved, there tends to be lots of misdirection. To your point around money laundering: you’re kidding yourself if you think that sort of thing has been completely quashed.
PabloSexcrowbar@piefed.social 10 hours ago
And even if they did shut it down remotely, that could be construed as an unauthorized act of war.