LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps • Hacker News Board

Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps

#541

Post by ljredux » Fri, Jul 24, 2026, 11:46 PM UTC

jhallenworld wrote: post #371

I have a new LG TV, holy moly what a terrible user experience. Out of the box it requires you to create an LG account. PITA, but OK. Except I was supposed to set the location first, instead I set it after. So now you have the problem that you can not log into LG.com using my own email (even from a web browser) because it says: "incorrect country". I contacted their tech support about this, the only fix is to switch b…

You will also have to change that LG account password every three months. It's like they are begging you to put in a weak password because changing a password with a remote control is hell.

Maybe check how many network queries the Netflix app is making on that TV set too. On mine, it makes 1,500 network queries every ten minutes. I didn't realise this until I got a Pi-hole. Even when Netflix has not been launched. As long as the TV is switched on, Netflix is sending queries to various netflix.com subdomains faster than a clock ticks and it never stops. It seems to be unique to the Netflix app on LGTV sets, and neither company cares about fixing it.

Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps

#542

Post by tosti » Sat, Jul 25, 2026, 7:05 AM UTC

neop1x wrote: post #530

tosti wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were second hand, idk. They were already burned when they arrived. Suffices for me to say I don't have much confidence in OLED.

There have been a huge progress in this regard! New OLEDs don't burn out like those early generations.

Soooo.... They burn a lot faster? Extra puff of smoke efect for good measure? ;)

Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps

#543

Post by inigyou » Sat, Jul 25, 2026, 11:37 AM UTC

BrenBarn wrote: post #525

inigyou wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would it be illegal though? What law?

Why not just ban all apps that "allow unknown third-parties to route their Internet traffic through a user’s TV"? (Or similarly for other devices.)

So basically ban VPN servers that are also TVs? Very specific law. If you don't limit it to TVs, then you just mandated KYC on all VPN services

Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps

#544

Post by sagarm » Sat, Jul 25, 2026, 3:14 PM UTC

inigyou wrote: post #488

jacobgold wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because this is exactly like file sharing...

The ways you are asking the government to mutilate the internet are quite similar to the ways the media industries asked the government to mutilate the internet.

Was requiring telephony providers to clamp down on spam or get blocked "mutilating the phone network?"

Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps

#545

Post by sagarm » Sat, Jul 25, 2026, 3:19 PM UTC

fc417fc802 wrote: post #347

amiga386 wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not the case. The article is quite clear that LG runs an "app store" where 42% of the "apps" likely contain residential proxies, and LG is going to make its "app store" developers stop doing that. From TFA: > “A residential proxy network is not an intended use for LG smart TVs, and LG Electronics is working with developers to remove the residential proxy option from their apps on the webOS platform,” Taylor s…

It very much is the case. Your own quote contradicts you. A smart tv is definitely a computer (one of the selling points is literally that it runs arbitrary apps) and LG is declaring that this "is not an intended use for LG smart TVs" and banning it. There is certainly a conversation to be had regarding consumer protection laws, the nature of an appliance, and the trade-offs thereof but this is not that conversation…

This is an insane position. Nobody is intentionally using their TV as a tor exit node.

Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps

#546

Post by laughing_man » Sun, Jul 26, 2026, 1:21 AM UTC

inigyou wrote: post #470

laughing_man wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heh. Steam thinks I'm 126.

Ouch. I wouldn't risk lying to Steam, given what it has the ability to delete.

I've never had a website do more than the equivalent of "Try again, smart guy" when I put in a ridiculous age.

Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps

#547

Post by beej71 » Mon, Jul 27, 2026, 5:06 AM UTC

inigyou wrote: post #486

beej71 wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally wouldn't because I don't want my IP associated with anything illegal.

There are drug dealers right now shipping drug packages with your address as the return address. Does that bother you?

Yes? But also I didn't say that was ok in exchange for no ads.

Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps

#548

Post by mastazi » Mon, Jul 27, 2026, 6:30 AM UTC

qlte wrote: post #537

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Do you know if this is a mandatory requirement set by Google, hence we can expect to find it on every single Google TV, or it depends on manufacturer? I cross checked some manuals from different brands and not all of them mention the "dumb mode" but maybe I just missed it. Based on my experience with Android devices, not every single Android feature is present on all devices, sometimes it's up to the manufacturer to implement certain features. I wonder if Google TV is the same.

Re: LG to ban residential proxies from smart TV apps

#549

Post by BrenBarn » Tue, Jul 28, 2026, 9:39 AM UTC

inigyou wrote: post #543

BrenBarn wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not just ban all apps that "allow unknown third-parties to route their Internet traffic through a user’s TV"? (Or similarly for other devices.)

So basically ban VPN servers that are also TVs? Very specific law. If you don't limit it to TVs, then you just mandated KYC on all VPN services

VPN services aren't generally running out of someone's house, and I think I might be okay with saying they cannot be. I think VPNs are a legitimate service but that doesn't necessarily mean we need to let everyone run one at home. The VPN may not need to know their customer but the VPN provider itself may need to register as a business, and then be held accountable if their service is being used to run botnets.