Smart TVs sending sensitive user data to Netflix and Facebook

Post by takeda » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 3:31 AM UTC

topspin wrote: post #47

jigglesniggle wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you be sure it is not connected to the Internet? I thought previously someone gave example of a Chinese TV connecting to open hotspots, or perhaps that was just a thought experiment.

> Can you be sure it is not connected to the Internet? Yes, you can be sure. The network capabilities aren't hidden spy equipment. You can disable WiFi and simply not connect Ethernet. The market for your data is relying on the indifference of 99% of TV buyers to data collection. Manufacturers and advertisers -- at least those not too far down the grey market rabbit hole -- don't care enough about the tiny fraction o…

Post by technofiend » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 3:40 AM UTC

dghughes wrote: post #163

throw03172019 wrote: post #36

I disabled WiFi on my Samsung TV after they were injecting ads into the home screen. Spend $800 to get ads served in their shitty/slow UI.

I can't watch more than 5 minutes of any YouTube video on my Samsung smart TV before an advertisement interrupts the video. Often several times for short videos. The ads are the same ones over and over too at the moment it's the J-Lo Hustler movie. If not that it's an ad from my local tourist board advertising my own home town. It's getting to the point where it's not even watchable. I click back to exit and maybe go…

Post by m-p-3 » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 3:48 AM UTC

paxys wrote: post #100

mikeryan wrote: post #50

This is a pretty open secret within the industry. Geographic data can be provided via setup (a lot of TV's ask for a zip code on setup) or usually simply via GeoIP lookup. Dig a bit deeper and you get into service provided by Samba TV and or Inscape and you can find that they're sending back frames of video in a lot of cases to track what you're watching. This data is becoming a huge mechanism for subsidizing TV sale…

Not even a secret. A TV manufacturer publicly said a while ago that a TV without "smart" features is more expensive for the company (even if sold at the same retail price) because they cannot make any money from selling usage data.

Post by rangibaby » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 3:57 AM UTC

rodgerd wrote: post #240

sjwright wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t let your TV access the internet at all. Smart TV interfaces are almost uniformly worse than set top boxes (one or more of: bad UI, slow CPU, weird quirks, few updates) so you should avoid it anyway. The current Apple TV (which I cite only because of familiarity) has a great UI, every major app, and robust HDMI-CEC support so you might never have to touch your TV’s remote again. And Apple respects your privacy.

Some smart TVs will join open networks if you don't give them one. And I expect that if 5G works as advertised you'll see surveillance capitalism adding 5G connectivity so you no longer have control over connectivity.

Post by MrStonedOne » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 4:04 AM UTC

gbear0 wrote: post #252

xcgfhgjbjhb wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked on that. It sends audio and/or video fingerprints (not frames, for privacy and bandwidth reasons), which are matched against a fingerprint database. Whatever people see on TV is usually 10 to 60 seconds behind the real live stream at the broadcaster (which is where the reference fingerprinting happens). GeoIP data can be used to roughly deduce where the TV is located, in order to better filter out false posi…

are you saying that hypothetically, if the MPAA comes knocking on Roku's door with enough money and a fingerprint database of torrented movies/songs, Roku could then tell them they have people matching those fingerprints? After which I'm assuming they'd have enough justification to get a court order to get the contact info from Roku for matching users?