Stop hooking up your LG tv to any network
Stop buying LG tvs.
LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps
531–540 of 549 posts
Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps
#532Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I'm calling for is exactly how things are already supposed to work. The US government should already be infiltrating hacker groups and identifying infected American computers. Internet providers should be informing customers that hackers have compromised their devices. Characterizing this as "mutilating the internet" is ridiculous.
You said the ISP should be legally required to shut off their internet.
Our government condemns and even demolishes people's houses when they're dangerous or become a public nuisances because their owners fail to maintain them.
Most Americans agree with this policy and don't see it as infringing on their freedom at all. Our choice is to enforce basic standards or allow our cities to become horrible places to live, and the same is true of the internet.
So yeah, it seems pretty reasonable to give people repeated warnings, then slow or pause their internet until they take basic steps to stop their connection from being used to abuse others.
Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps
#533Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Increasingly software is distributed by "curl dodgysite.com/get.sh|sudo bash -" I don't think this is the norm at all. I have seen curl/bash install scripts for tools like Claude Code, but they don't use sudo, and the expectation is that you deploy them in isolated user accounts or containers.
> the expectation is that you deploy them in isolated user accounts or containers. Why are you lying right now? This is a norm across the dev tools world for businesses to distribute dodgy curl piped to bash scripts that users install without question, popular examples: homebrew, docker, nvm, bun, deno, k3s. There is zero "expectation" given by any of these install scripts that they are isolated. Can you even find a…
> Can you even find a single source online that suggests doing what you said for you to think its a commonly held expectation?
Isn't it common sense? Do you want coding agents to read and possibly upload somewhere the contents of your home directory?
Also, the expectation on Linux is that you install tools like Docker from the distro's repos.
Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps
#534Earlier quoted context omitted.
Slowing down your internet connection due to using your bandwidth without your knowledge, getting blocked by websites due to malicious traffic from your IP address, extra annoying captchas due to the same. Those were just the first 3 things off the top of my head.
Got plenty of bandwidth, sites block you regardless, you get captchas regardless. Plus, IP addresses rotate once a day so you're just as likely to get someone else's bad reputation anyway. To sue them you'd have to show some actual, concrete harm. For example you contact a site that is blocking you and they tell you it's due to a certain request and you trace that request to the proxy.
> Plus, IP addresses rotate once a day
And I would be miserable if I were subjected to the volume of captchas and blocks on my regular internet connection that I see on the occasion I use Tor.
Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps
#535Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe 10 years ago. Very few homes have an open network today, ISPs all ship their routers with random passwords and/or force the customer to create a WiFi password during setup.
Comcast still defaults to adding an Xfinity access point to their routers for other customers to use.
Which requires login (and a separate paid subscription these days).
Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps
#536Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can replace the Android TV launcher with an alternative like Projectivy [1] to get rid of whatever nonsense the stock launcher tries to push. Add Flicky [2] to address F-Droid and you've got a nuisance-free Android TV. [1] https://github.com/spocky/miproja1 [2] https://github.com/mlm-games/flicky
Thanks, however is kind of the problem, it shouldn't be a thing in first place.
I’m perfectly happy with the status quo where a subsidized $25 Onn 4K streamer from Walmart can easily be turned into a snappy, ad-free, LAN hosted Jellyfin box, with remappable remote buttons after I haven’t looked at the stock Google TV home screen on any of my devices in years.
Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps
#537Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can easily turn dumb mode on any smart TV.
Wait - how? I thought the whole reason the darn things are lower cost than equivalent PC monitors is the smart mode tracks viewing habits and seeks that to data brokers?
Every Google TV enabled smart TV I’ve seen has a built in dumb mode that’s the first question asked when the TV is first setup. It does exactly what you expect.
Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps
#538Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you don't ever give your network credentials to the Smart TV you've closed off 99% of the attack surface.
From previous discussions there are apparently TVs which will connect to any open network nearby, if it can find one. I got myself a normal, non-smart Philips 49" TV some ten years ago, it's good, but I don't expect to be able to find something similar anymore.
Please provide any evidence of a specific TV model that has done this.
Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps
#539My TV doesn't know my router's wi-fi password.
Hope you don't have any open WiFi networks nearby. IMO it's better to put it on one of your networks and isolate it from the internet and other devices.
This is an urban legend.
(And made way more sense 15 years ago when smart TVs were just starting to become common and open WiFi without captive portals actually still existed).
Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps
#540Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's Windows Update that's installing LG crapware upon seeing relevant hardware IDs This is also a misrepresentation. Microsoft has provided LG with a certificate to sign its driver packages with, and allows LG to upload packages to Windows Update, which includes a feature to install sidecar applications. Now, the spirit of this feature is that any application is meant to provide genuine configuration functionality…
> One can't expect that every driver package submission from every vendor is thoroughly vetted every time, this is a matter of trust and respect. Maybe not, but LG has violated this trust and should therefore be either fined or severely restricted by Microsoft. Banning will likely cause more problems than solutions, but they shouldn't get away with this. Adware was a huge problem during the Windows XP era, can't beli…
> I doubt there's actually millions of hardware vendors.
Almost certainly correct because there are only 2^16 USB manufacturer IDs, of which (warning, Google AI quick result...) only 3400 are used. Tiny vendors of e.g. USB drives often seem to use the vendor and device ID of the interface chip manufacturer, but that's probably a good filter for really unimportant ones. Of course not every device has USB, but most major hardware vendors implement USB somewhere and have an official USB vendor ID.