I think products like JetKVM are targeting hobbyists and small outfits; corporations who aren't on a public cloud are using stuff like idrac, ilo, or dedicated rackmount KVM hardware.
Homelabbers tend to like rackmount. (I've owned multiple servers with such dedicated remote management/access hardware built in.)
JetKVM seems designed to be more a shadow IT at individual desks solution, for use at companies that don't prohibit and actively police that.
The PiKVM runs wireguard so it's reasonably secure. I assume JetKVM can do the same.
https://web.archive.org/web/20200312000527/http://www.cfcl.c...
>We get occasional inquiries about our name. In case you are wondering, it is a pun on "Can't afford a computer laboratory". (We have plenty of computers, to be sure, but the ideal computer laboratory will always be beyond our reach. :-)
>Inspiration for the name was drawn from Walker A. Tompkins, a family friend and prolific writer (of adventures, history, and westerns). Mr. Tompkins used the name "Canta Forda Rancho" for his home in Santa Barbara, CA.
> targeting hobbyists and small outfits
I'm joking a bit but these are exactly the entities that have fewer capabilities to detect malicious behavior.
Assuming JetKVM is operating in full good faith that doesn't mean they themselves aren't going to be the target. You compromise them and you compromise all their customers. That's true regardless of the company size, but is also the reason for transparency
Putting a BMC or KVM on the Internet is hilariously unwise.
No need worry about dodgy remote desktop software — the attackers will be able to back door the firmware!
(Yes, iLO verifies firmware signatures… but yes they’ve had horrific vulnerabilities, worse than nightmares).