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

72% of smart TVs and 46% of game consoles hardcode DNS settings

labzilla.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 673 posts

Re: 72% of smart TVs and 46% of game consoles hardcode DNS settings

#401

Post by ThePhysicist »

oh_sigh wrote: post #373
ThePhysicist wrote: post #360

I haven't been able to verify this yet but I think my (2015) Samsung SmartTV tries to ping a specific Samsung domain to determine whether the device is connected to the Internet. Last weekend something must've happend to that domain because the TV told me it wasn't connected to the Internet and refused to start any app. The Internet connection (as well as the local Wifi connection), however, was perfectly fine. So I…

The worst part is that there isn't just a couple super popular models of TVs that people could develop custom firmwares for, there are thousands of skus for televisions and each of them may behave in a different manner meaning that at their end of life it is unlikely that any group is going to go through the effort to free them from death.

Yeah it's annoying. But at least they still have a normal HDMI input, so I could still buy a smart TV stick to plug into that (or use a laptop). That seems more and more attractive as well since after a recent software update my TV now takes around a minute to boot to its smart OS, I suspect because the old hardware can't keep up with the new software.

Re: 72% of smart TVs and 46% of game consoles hardcode DNS settings

#402

Post by cannabis_sam »

jon-wood wrote: post #10

I’m responsible for a bunch of IoT hardware, and every firmware spec I write includes a note on not using the DNS servers provided via DHCP. While sure there are companies explicitly doing this to avoid filtering, at least in my case it’s because a significant proportion of DHCP servers are configured to send DNS to your ISP, and ISP provided DNS is almost universally terrible. They’ll ignore TTLs, rewrite NXDOMAIN r…

> ISP provided DNS is almost universally terrible

Yet that is what internet actually is for a lot of people...

Re: 72% of smart TVs and 46% of game consoles hardcode DNS settings

#403

Post by slg »

bo1024 wrote: post #361
onion2k wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would essentially force people to buy two devices - one for receiving content to display and a second to display it. All your solution does is shift the problem on to the receiving device. It wouldn't fix anything, and at the same time it'd increase the cost and complexity for the user (by a very small amount admittedly).

Yes, and there are a lot of good reasons for that! The two functions become obsolete at different rates, and people have different needs for each of them, so it's the right place to put an abstraction layer. When I buy a computer monitor, I can pair it with any computer I want. I can upgrade the graphics card or processor independently of the monitor. I'm not locked in to a particular computer based on the features o…

>The two functions become obsolete at different rates

The implication here is that the connectivity tech goes obsolete quicker than screen tech. That has traditionally been true, but has it been over the last 5 years or so? We don't even have to get into the specific display technology. Just from a feature perspective, there has been a lot of innovation in screens including 4k, HDR, and high refresh rates.

Re: 72% of smart TVs and 46% of game consoles hardcode DNS settings

#404

Post by coin »

boardwaalk wrote: post #304
Bud wrote: post #261

This isn't difficult: TVs should not be "smart". TVs should be incredibly dumb. They should be screens for displaying stuff. That's it. Nothing else. No network connection of any kind, no apps, no software beyond that necessary to do basic setup of how that screen works: brightness, input selection, etc.

You could get a smart TV and just not connect it to the internet. If you were really paranoid, you could disconnect/snip the wifi antenna. At least my TV still allow firmware updates via USB, so you may not lose that. Not that it'd matter much if you weren't using any smart features, but they do still provide things like improving compatibility with devices (recently HDMI 2.1). I have a bigger issue with VR headsets.…

> just not connect it to the internet

Wait until they have TVs that connect to cellular which doesn't need your consent

Re: 72% of smart TVs and 46% of game consoles hardcode DNS settings

#405

Post by icedchai »

throwaway09223 wrote: post #398
smileysteve wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disagree. My 75 yo parents still have a dumb tv. They have different remotes for cable, sound, blue ray player ( some smart apps), fire tv, and apple tv. Their life is not easier because of this, they don't watch what they want when they want because it takes minutes to get to a different source. I know what I'm getting them for Christmas

The right way to fix this is one single smart device, which is the only device connected to the dumb TV. The best of these types don't have a remote. They're controlled by a phone. If the intelligence is built into the TV then it cannot be updated or replaced -- so either there will again be multiple devices, or the TV will need to be replaced on a frequent basis. A smart TV makes the problem you describe even worse

My smart TV's built in apps (Netflix, mainly) are incredibly unstable. About 5 years back I started to use a Firestick instead. The TV is best as just a TV.

Re: 72% of smart TVs and 46% of game consoles hardcode DNS settings

#406

Post by bigbubba »

rovr138 wrote: post #399
bigbubba wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many years is 'decades'? About 4 or 5 years ago I took apart a freezer that was about 10 years old. The compressor seemed to be switched by a thermostat; I found nothing that would have firmware.

That freezer is 1.5 decades.

Yes, and wouldn't really surprise me if freezers with the same design can still be found in stores today.

Re: 72% of smart TVs and 46% of game consoles hardcode DNS settings

#407

Post by toast0 »

imtringued wrote: post #371
toast0 wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not adverse to buying commercial displays for home use, but it's hard to find places that carry them and list prices. Those I have seen prices for were usually much more expensive than TV branded displays. Then comes the other big thing. How am I supposed to spend so much when I can't see the thing before I buy it, and there's not much in the way of reviews? I'm just hoping my next TV doesn't complain much when I…

>I'm not adverse to buying commercial displays for home use, but it's hard to find places that carry them and list prices. I just spent 3 minutes googling for dumb tvs and found lots of them instantly. Why bother with commercial displays if you can buy cheap dumb TVs at Walmart? Here's a review for one [0]. [0] https://youtu.be/394sDSOI9dU

Yeah, I've seen the Sceptre line, and it's nice to have it, but amazon reviews say they're slow to respond to the remote and change channels etc.

And, of course, none or the fancy things like OLED or even local dimming/HDR.

Seems like an OK bet if you're looking for a basic TV though.

Re: 72% of smart TVs and 46% of game consoles hardcode DNS settings

#408

Post by bborud »

rightbyte wrote: post #15
jon-wood wrote: post #10

I’m responsible for a bunch of IoT hardware, and every firmware spec I write includes a note on not using the DNS servers provided via DHCP. While sure there are companies explicitly doing this to avoid filtering, at least in my case it’s because a significant proportion of DHCP servers are configured to send DNS to your ISP, and ISP provided DNS is almost universally terrible. They’ll ignore TTLs, rewrite NXDOMAIN r…

What DNS do you hardcode? Google's? Or do you advice the use to set it up himself? I am very suspicious of the push for https and the like. I feel it is mainly about hiding the payload from me not any third party.

My company makes IoT systems to support low power devices that use mobile (NB-IoT and LTE-M) connectivity and we have some similar problems having to do with mobile networks and APNs.

The way we solve this is that we assume any knowledge the device has about the outside world can become obsolete, so we do we have a two layer approach.

The bottom layer is that we have a set of semi hard-coded fallback values that are likely to work in the forseeable future. Updating these fallbacks requires an over the air firmware upgrade which isn't a terribly big deal since we regularly upgrade firmware over the air. The goal of these values is to make sure we can get the device online and direct it to somewhere where we can trigger firmware updates.

The second layer is that one or more times per day we ping a config server that sends a packet with configuration data to the unit. This is typically API endpoints etc. The configuration data is essentially a prioritized list of resources, so if one won't respond it will go to the next on the list (while still trying to determine if a higher priority resource becomes available).

Last week we got a chance to see how this failed over beautifully as multiple resources were removed and a fleet of devices just adapted as they should. (The shutdown of these resources were planned, but presented a good opportunity to do a fire drill).

Re: 72% of smart TVs and 46% of game consoles hardcode DNS settings

#409

Post by iso947 »

nitrogen wrote: post #320
cpuguy83 wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one exception... it is really convenient to be able to use my phone to control the tv, even if it is only to change inputs. And that's how they get you.

There's no reason any phone shouldn't be able to control any TV, except that IR ports are no longer popular on handheld devices. Back in the 90s there were wristwatches that could control any TV.

IR watches were always hilarious at school. I suspect in pubs too.

Re: 72% of smart TVs and 46% of game consoles hardcode DNS settings

#410

Post by mrmanner »

shawnz wrote: post #382
mrmanner wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read that as LanternLight83 is both the network operator and the user in this case, and if so it’s not really a problem. I would also love to MitM myself in some cases, mostly because it’d be interesting to see what’s going on.

Yes, but my point is that if you feel it's justified for your own network then you ought to expect every other network operator will feel that way about their network too. So before applying that mentality, it would be wise to consider what your experience would be like if all your neighbours, friends, colleagues etc also did that on their networks.

Is the point that I sometimes use these networks? Then I somewhat agree - I would set up a separate guest network without shenanigans for guests to use. This avoids both the ethical sketchiness and having to explain why their web browser is shouting at them
Post reply on HN