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

Vendors must start adding physical on/off switches to devices that can spy on us

larrysanger.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 200 posts

Re: Vendors must start adding physical on/off switches to devices that can spy on us

#161

Post by lucb1e »

kiallmacinnes wrote: post #128
lucb1e wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can turn that off, though. Not that I trust it to work, but at least legally you can deny that. Do you happen to know about GPS? Because my phone sometimes picks up GPS faster than should be physically possible (knowing a thing or two about how GPS works), and sometimes it takes a normal amount of time. I have GPS turned off almost all the time, don't have a Google account logged in, everything I can deny to Goog…

Most phones use Assisted GPS. It's a combination of cell tower triangulation and GPS. You'll get a potentially inaccurate "GPS" location based on the cell towers and signals you can see, and this will eventually turn into a real GPS lock. As I understand it, this cell tower location actually helps achieve a real GPS location faster that would be normal - but I'm unsure how that would work .. I'd be guessing at best ;…

No, that involve sending data to Google (one of the reasons I mentioned turning all that crap off), or a relatively complex config to swap out the location provider for Mozilla's which I haven't done yet on this phone.

Re: Vendors must start adding physical on/off switches to devices that can spy on us

#162

Post by maxheadroom »

HALtheWise wrote: post #101

Am I the only one who has far more sensitive content visible on the screen and filesystem of my computer than through its camera? I feel like, at least for the threat models that I consider likely, if someone manages to hack my laptop and get (for example) microphone access, the thing I am most worried about is that they will use acoustic analysis of keystrokes to recover my banking password, not that they will hear…

Getting your password isn't as compromising as, say, getting a photo of you nude, in the security theatre-sense.

Think of the OPM hack[0] and the potential for a foreign entity to compromise someone (that they know has a security clearance) with blackmail. This has a much larger and potentially far longer ROI than a simple compromise of a password; which probably has to be changed every 'x' days, anyways.

You have to think of things like this in terms of long-term yield and not immediate results; unless we're talking crackers, then they're almost always after immediate results.

[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Personnel_Management...

Re: Vendors must start adding physical on/off switches to devices that can spy on us

#163

Post by croisillon »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #91
croisillon wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the printer/scanner/copier at my workplace needs about 30 seconds when you press the physical switch to actually switch off, it's more of a command than an actual switch

So does your desktop computer, laptop, and phone?

maybe but I never switch off my computers physically, I always use a command

Re: Vendors must start adding physical on/off switches to devices that can spy on us

#164

Post by chmod775 »

maxheadroom wrote: post #162
HALtheWise wrote: post #101

Am I the only one who has far more sensitive content visible on the screen and filesystem of my computer than through its camera? I feel like, at least for the threat models that I consider likely, if someone manages to hack my laptop and get (for example) microphone access, the thing I am most worried about is that they will use acoustic analysis of keystrokes to recover my banking password, not that they will hear…

Getting your password isn't as compromising as, say, getting a photo of you nude, in the security theatre-sense. Think of the OPM hack[0] and the potential for a foreign entity to compromise someone (that they know has a security clearance) with blackmail. This has a much larger and potentially far longer ROI than a simple compromise of a password; which probably has to be changed every 'x' days, anyways. You have to…

> Getting your password isn't as compromising as, say, getting a photo of you nude, in the security theatre-sense.

That... really depends on the society you live in and your own insecurities.

Fear and prohibition surrounding the naked body is a cultural/religious thing.

The most prudish US-regions are probably somewhere in the middle of central Europe and Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia.

I won't generalize to the whole of the US because I know there's a wide spectrum.

However US-wide media serve the lowest common denominator, spreading the unfounded phobia and taboo of nude people.

Personally I couldn't give a damn whether someone has pictures of me nude. People probably do since I was bathing in the ocean naked on some occasions. I don't really want any pictures of myself on the internet (with my name), but nude or not doesn't make much of a difference to me.

I'm more afraid of ending up in some facial recognition database and private companies starting to track my every move.

Re: Vendors must start adding physical on/off switches to devices that can spy on us

#165

Post by sudoaza »

I would totally buy into this, recently i found two really disturbing facts that made me uninstall Instagram, - first that while its open it listens to what you say and then shows you adds based on that (no i didnt search for the same thing or could be an expected interest of me) - second i found that my location was briefly turning on and back off by itself, on one of those on/off and instagram notification arrived, after uninstalling that never repeated.

We need control back on our devices. I friend went so far as to add a physical on/off on he's macbook. I went out of my way to get a mobile i can root easily. There is a market for this.

Re: Vendors must start adding physical on/off switches to devices that can spy on us

#166

Post by everdrive »

kiallmacinnes wrote: post #126
everdrive wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Android, you actually can't trust when the OS says the WiFi is "off." Yes, the network is not connected, but google is still tracking SSIDs.

To be fair, the WiFi connection is off, it's just the radio is not... It's not so much a lie, rather it's an implementation that covers the average persons expectations 100%, but keeps something they might not want , but weren't thinking about when they pressed that button. To be clear, I don't like the behaviour.. but it's not misleading, it just doesn't cater to everyones desires.

I thought it was misleading. I can actually turn the radio off on a computer, and didn't expect the smartphone behavior to differ.

Re: Vendors must start adding physical on/off switches to devices that can spy on us

#167

Post by XorNot »

chmod775 wrote: post #164
maxheadroom wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting your password isn't as compromising as, say, getting a photo of you nude, in the security theatre-sense. Think of the OPM hack[0] and the potential for a foreign entity to compromise someone (that they know has a security clearance) with blackmail. This has a much larger and potentially far longer ROI than a simple compromise of a password; which probably has to be changed every 'x' days, anyways. You have to…

> Getting your password isn't as compromising as, say, getting a photo of you nude, in the security theatre-sense. That... really depends on the society you live in and your own insecurities. Fear and prohibition surrounding the naked body is a cultural/religious thing. The most prudish US-regions are probably somewhere in the middle of central Europe and Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia. I won't generalize to the…

The tracking doesn't bother me as much as the individualization of data-mining does. The use of collected data to run unexplainable AI systems which can do things from determine how the courts treat me, to what is recommended to me, is the real threat.

The problem with blackmail is it almost never happens - i.e. the profitable digital blackmail is cryptolocker. But the real negative to your life is the unaccountable compiling and production of data products which can be used to try and describe your life to others - credit ratings being mapped to internet activity or insurance rates, or digital dossiers being sold to companies to screen new hires in combination with some blackbox "risk" AI system - or surveillance cameras running people in-real time through a profiler which then re-deploys police units on the go.

The risk is...not dramatic? I think is what I want to say. It's mundane - so mundane that its been creeping up on us for decades and is very gradually attacking people all because individually it all sounds reasonable.

Re: Vendors must start adding physical on/off switches to devices that can spy on us

#168

Post by Nasrudith »

HNKingpin wrote: post #79
svrtknst wrote: post #75

While physical switches would be nice, and I generally am a fan of them, IMO they still require trust in the manufacturer. If I don't trust their software switches, why would I trust their hardware switches?

You should be able to see the effects, no? At least in cameras (the light won't be flashing).

Well the thing is they are absurdly fine electronics. It is trivial to reroute so that the switch applies to the LED and not the camera itself (and some other trickery based upon reading its state while keeping it covertly operational). Said lie could still be detected in other ways of course but it wouldn't be a simple and complete fix.

Re: Vendors must start adding physical on/off switches to devices that can spy on us

#169

Post by XorNot »

watwut wrote: post #159
HALtheWise wrote: post #101

Am I the only one who has far more sensitive content visible on the screen and filesystem of my computer than through its camera? I feel like, at least for the threat models that I consider likely, if someone manages to hack my laptop and get (for example) microphone access, the thing I am most worried about is that they will use acoustic analysis of keystrokes to recover my banking password, not that they will hear…

The worry is more about stalkers and abusive partners. Abusive partner using it to further control you or hear that you plan to leave or hear that you talk with someone he disapprove (e.g. vuctim breaking out of isolation and distorted reality victim is in). Those situations are physically dangerous when they happen.

Sure but you're attacking the problem from the wrong vector: the partner has physical access to the device and control to install malware, and is abusive. Turning off the microphone or camera is going to trigger retaliation anyway - it doesn't help in this scenario because the problem is the abuser.

Helping the victim out of that relationship is what needs to happen - no amount of technical cleverness is going to make it better. Improving our laws certainly would (i.e. taking that sort of device compromise as a serious crime would be extremely useful in this context).

Re: Vendors must start adding physical on/off switches to devices that can spy on us

#170

Post by jondumbau »

sudoaza wrote: post #165

I would totally buy into this, recently i found two really disturbing facts that made me uninstall Instagram, - first that while its open it listens to what you say and then shows you adds based on that (no i didnt search for the same thing or could be an expected interest of me) - second i found that my location was briefly turning on and back off by itself, on one of those on/off and instagram notification arrived,…

Can anyone else comment or corroborate this? I don't disbelieve you but it's a gigantic if substantiated and would definitely get me to leave the platform.
Post reply on HN