Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

blog.malwarebytes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 119 posts

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#91

Post by r00fus »

smelendez wrote: post #84
trevyn wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think I'm a high profile enough target that somebody would bother sifting through everything I say in front of my laptop for something interesting. The threat model is closer to automated transcription, global history search, and parallel construction.

I think that would be hard to pull off in the US, where I live. There are enough paranoid infosec people that would spot the data transmission or CPU usage. But certainly no harm done in muffling or ripping out a mic if you're concerned!

Not if it’s intermittent / on-demand and hiding within existing traffic.

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#92

Post by Baeocystin »

skookumchuck wrote: post #90
ncallaway wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The question is, does that really matter? I absolutely think it does. I have also bought an Amazon Echo, but I unplug it when it's out of use for extended periods of time. I wouldn't purchase a similar product from Facebook, because I trust Amazon with my personal data more than Facebook. I've never purchased a Smart TV that contains a microphone. Just because I make some decisions you disagree with in balancing my…

> I have also bought an Amazon Echo, but I unplug it when it's out of use for extended periods of time. I'd buy an Echo if it had a physical switch to enable the microphone, along with a light that says its on. Software switches are worthless.

I power my echo through a smart plug. Works great... assuming there isn't a hidden mic in the plug. :D

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#93

Post by rhizome »

akira2501 wrote: post #75
jstanley wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you in principle, but I think the Nest actually only includes a hidden microphone, not a hidden camera.

This is something I always ask people with those little "camera blockers" attached to their laptops: "How do you block the microphone?" and "Which is worse? Recording video of you all day, or recording audio of you all day?

Lenovo lets you order a ThinkPad with neither camera nor microphone, and USB webcams are small and fit easily in a bag or backpack.

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#94

Post by rhizome »

iforgotpassword wrote: post #19

I suspect this is going to be an unpopular opinion, but I still don't get the fuzz. People buy crap like Amazon echo left and right, and have been carrying little computers with microphones and an internet connection around all day for even longer. Apart from the fact that any sane person shouldn't trust any google product value their privacy in the first place, how many people are there consciously not buying a smar…

"People" use Facebook and vote, but it's really not that simple now, is it?

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#95

Post by harry8 »

Gaelan wrote: post #80
pdkl95 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The breach of trust is bad enough, but the fact that it is a microphone opens the possibility of criminal wiretapping charges.

Even if the mic was never on?

Yes! Even if the gun to your head was never fired.

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#96

Post by pdkl95 »

smelendez wrote: post #84
trevyn wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think I'm a high profile enough target that somebody would bother sifting through everything I say in front of my laptop for something interesting. The threat model is closer to automated transcription, global history search, and parallel construction.

I think that would be hard to pull off in the US, where I live. There are enough paranoid infosec people that would spot the data transmission or CPU usage. But certainly no harm done in muffling or ripping out a mic if you're concerned!

Why would anybody bother trying to hide traffic? Lots of apps already waste bandwidth and CPU to exfiltrate a wide variety of data, often sending it straight to Facebook[1]. They simply relabeled it "analytics",

[1] https://media.ccc.de/v/35c3-9941-how_facebook_tracks_you_on_...

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#97

Post by bg24 »

A product release in an established organization goes through legal checklist. It could have been one of those “our checklist for search, chrome, nest etc. can be same”. I am not defending nest. Just saying that sometimes these get bypassed, people move to other jobs, new folks come in, someone finds out and damage control begins.

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#98

Post by pacala »

akira2501 wrote: post #75
jstanley wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you in principle, but I think the Nest actually only includes a hidden microphone, not a hidden camera.

This is something I always ask people with those little "camera blockers" attached to their laptops: "How do you block the microphone?" and "Which is worse? Recording video of you all day, or recording audio of you all day?

So how do I block the microphone on my MacBook?

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#99

Post by brandon272 »

iforgotpassword wrote: post #19

I suspect this is going to be an unpopular opinion, but I still don't get the fuzz. People buy crap like Amazon echo left and right, and have been carrying little computers with microphones and an internet connection around all day for even longer. Apart from the fact that any sane person shouldn't trust any google product value their privacy in the first place, how many people are there consciously not buying a smar…

I believe that one reason it grinds people's gears is that it's symbolic of a larger problem. Dumping microphones in products and then having it not occur to you to even note the microphone in a spec represents a blind spot in how this company views privacy, and indicates how they take for granted the ability to add whatever sensors and capture hardware into their products with the purpose of collecting information about their customers - with or without their consent.

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#100

Post by PowerfulWizard »

pacala wrote: post #98
akira2501 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is something I always ask people with those little "camera blockers" attached to their laptops: "How do you block the microphone?" and "Which is worse? Recording video of you all day, or recording audio of you all day?

So how do I block the microphone on my MacBook?

Zuckerberg released a photo once where he had a piece of tape over the microphone hole on the size. I don't know what the effect is, but it would be easy to test.
Post reply on HN