There are countless systems out there which are far older and also more secure. Age is of zero relevance except to those who propagate forced obolescence, mindless consumption, and generation of massive amounts of e-waste. This "update mentality" is a cancer itself. Especially when this is supposed to be a simple device.

That said, relying on the same credentials for a long time is more problematic. My bet is on credentials being bruteforced, especially if many people have left them at their default or used easily guessable ones.

Age is of zero relevance for hard drives?

Also - age is of zero relevance to internet connected linux devices?

I rely on many "8-10 year old device that hadn’t received a security update in 6+ years". My coffee machine. My fridge. My hifi. All my motorcycles. None of them run linux and are directly connected to the internet.

But think about this from the perspective of the average buyer/user. Hard drives are traditionally "local". Local = safe. Now, a new generation of drives are introduced with this awesome capability to get access to data remotely. "Cool", they think. They don't understand how the Internet works, and so they don't really see the issue, or if they have a basic understanding of networks they might understandably believe that "it's behind the router, so it's safe".

The remote access feature was disabled by default. For many people, the only reason it was accessing the internet was so it could get security updates.

I can't imagine a scenario where people assume an 8 y.o. device is automatically trash, only because it's old.

I'm typing this on a 10 y.o. laptop. It still works. Sure, the manufacturer and browser vendor released updates, but it wouldn't be too out of the ordinary if it didn't.

That being said, I think its predecessor would still work (for posting a comment to HN at least)

tell that to grandma who just wants to store her family photos. imagine if this mindset was extended to automobiles.