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

216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 1001 posts

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#551

Post by wolvoleo »

antonkochubey wrote: post #285
otikik wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well that is how Airtags work. Any iphone/ipad/mac nearby will act as a router for them[1] Given that we have already established that LG is a shady company, I wouldn't put it beyond them to try to use the same trick. [1] https://lifehacker.com/tech/how-apple-airtags-actually-work

It's also how Amazon Sidewalk works for many Alexa-enabled devices

Yeah and my worry is, TVs like this can use sidewalk to connect to when they are not provided with internet access by the user (either but plugging into ethernet or connecting WiFi). Leaving the TV with an always-available exfiltration channel for it's espionage of the user's viewing habits.

This is a really bad thing for those of us who until now have just not connected our 'smart' shit to the internet.

Where I live in the EU they don't do sidewalk otherwise I'd have to look at ways to fight it (disassociate connections or DDoS the devices providing sidewalk routing)

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#552

Post by wolvoleo »

NooneAtAll3 wrote: post #179
korzinka wrote: post #107

I've bought an LG Smart TV 5 years ago, read t&c where I was supposed to grant them any data they wanted, decided to disagree and kept all network functions disabled. I was ridiculed by my friends for that. At some point, I thought - maybe I'm really crazy to do so? Who am I, a caveman, a luddite? Oh well, I'm not. Not a bad tv though, many HDMI ports!

> Not a bad tv though, many HDMI ports! that's not a plus, tho

Why?

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#553

Post by wolvoleo »

miki123211 wrote: post #287
unixhero wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do screenshot? Do you have a source so I can read more?

It's (mostly) a US thing; basically subsidizing TV prices with ad revenue. It's how the entry-level companies like Vizio operate, though the "big brand" TV makers are certainly just as guilty here. It's much less of a thing in the EU, where data privacy laws are stricter and TVs are hence (comparatively) more expensive. As far as I know, they don't literally scan your media libraries; they screenshot whatever you're…

No this is isn't just a US thing anymore. Every TV has automatic content recognition now, of some kind or other. Even in the EU.

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#554

Post by II2II »

ptx wrote: post #545

I don't think the title ( edit: of the thread merged into this one! ) is accurate. Starting at 16:04, they say that they merely claim that the TV has the capability to be used as a listening device. In the first 34 minutes, they don't seem to show that LG are actually recording audio from the surroundings (only from the content playing) and after that they start investigating whether you could record audio if you tak…

EDIT: Just to be clear, the parent's post was originally made in relation to an article/thread called: "LG smart TVs caught logging audio with screen off and snooping on local devices". My response was written at the same time.

> So the video doesn't seem to support the claim in the article that "LG smart TVs continuously [...] log microphone audio while appearing to be turned off".

While it is a bit unclear as to whether the logging and transmitting of audio is happening[1], without hacking the device, they were also quite clear that they made it extremely difficult (if not impossible) to MITM certain encrypted communications on their consumer devices. Combining that with claims they make about advertising makes LG's actions highly suspect.

While the video is quite clear that they are not saying LG is doing this (for legal reasons), the set out to prove the capabilities are there and the privacy related configuration options are very weak. For example: the microphone switch only controls one of the onboard microphones. Even if it physically cut off all of the microphones, there are other vectors that could only be software controlled (such as voice enabled remote controls).

Either way, whether it is LG or a third party, the capability to log and transmit audio can certainly be exploited.

Perhaps it is time we start considering whether we should do something just because it can be done. That is to say: do we really need to control a television by voice, or have other features that require a microphone, just because adding a microphone is cheap and there is enough compute to process the data?

[1] I got the impression they were claiming that the audio was recorded and stored on device. They simply could not prove it was sent to LG.

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#555

Post by robin_reala »

blaze33 wrote: post #97
Y-bar wrote: post #77

notebookcheck.net: > We value your privacy Shares my browsing info with 1745 "partners" with no clear way to opt out (which ought to be opt-in by the way to be compliant with ePrivacy and GDPR).

"We value your privacy" → "Your private data is valuable" (I guess)

”We assign a value to your privacy”

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#556

Post by AgentOrange1234 »

ticulatedspline wrote: post #525

I'm surprised this hasn't run afoul of all-party wiretap laws. Even if you could waive your own rights via ToS other people in the house may not have agreed. Theoretically I could see LG or even the TV's owner being culpable. I'd love to see that case hit the media. Average citizen jailed over wiretap violations because they let their TV record a guest.

Really good question. For instance, TX is a one-party consent state. If the TV is recording what's happening in the living room with nobody's knowledge, that seems like a very clear violation of "one party in the conversation needs to know it's being recorded." IANAL

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#557

Post by wolvoleo »

zerof1l wrote: post #78

I have a rooted LG C4. Beyond blocking things at the DNS level, not accepting terms, not using AI, I wonder if there’s some existing software solution or a documented step-by-step to remove this bloatware/spyware.

It'll be difficult. It's webos of which there's very little custom development.

You'd be better off with an android tv which you can poke at using adb and disable services. Maybe even root it. And install alternative software like smarttubenext.

Unfortunately there very few Android based TVs left. Phillips recently switched to Titanos, Samsung has tizen, Amazon has a new OS. I think it's just Sony that's left on android now.

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#558

Post by nobody9999 »

washelterskelte wrote: post #540
hvb2 wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we have an (ever growing) list of forbidden clauses that even when written and signed by consumer are null and void I'm pretty sure that's true almost everywhere. Law beats contract. The real question is how strong the laws are. In the US not so much because of small government and stuff, especially in red states.

The law matters very little when enforcing it in court often means a multiyear lawsuit against an opponent which employs an army of attorneys, has effectively unlimited amounts of money, will likely cost you ruinious sums of money, and for an outcome that's far from guaranteed.

>The law matters very little when enforcing it in court often means a multiyear lawsuit against an opponent which employs an army of attorneys, has effectively unlimited amounts of money, will likely cost you ruinious sums of money, and for an outcome that's far from guaranteed.

Or when you can't even enforce anything in court as you've already given up your right to spend all your money suing, as binding arbitration is the required and only mechanism to "resolve disputes." To make it extra fair, the corporation pays the arbitration firm for their "objective" decisions and not you.

What could go wrong?

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#559

Post by sbarre »

rpdillon wrote: post #399
korzinka wrote: post #107

I've bought an LG Smart TV 5 years ago, read t&c where I was supposed to grant them any data they wanted, decided to disagree and kept all network functions disabled. I was ridiculed by my friends for that. At some point, I thought - maybe I'm really crazy to do so? Who am I, a caveman, a luddite? Oh well, I'm not. Not a bad tv though, many HDMI ports!

I have a similar reaction from folks when I don't trust services/devices. Most telling moment was when I refused to upload my license to LinkedIn because I lost 2FA (token on phone, phone destroyed). Microsoft assured me they would "delete the license as soon as it was verified". I've written too many software systems for too many companies, and I do not believe them . Of course, they'd outsourced to AU10TIX, which d…

> my conclusion after dealing with them for many years is they will lie, cheat, and steal to get whatever they want

Honestly, it's not even that extreme in most cases. I think it's usually not malice, it's incompetence.

That's why I don't trust big companies with my data. Nothing to do with some CEO's evil plans, but more to do with the hundreds/thousands of mid-level "not my job" or "doing my best" workers who are actually in charge of handling my data.

Re: 216M Spy TVs – The LG Smart TV Problem [video]

#560

Post by ezst »

layer8 wrote: post #486
ezst wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This. Why would you even connect TV to the network? I happen to have a NAS with family pictures I like to display. I can (and do) firewall that thing, but then you hit other issues like the apps you need to show pictures and movies in the first place not to install/run. I've yet to hear of a reasonable recipe to isolate and secure such connected TVs. And don't get me started on Chromecast or other Android dongles,…

You can always just connect your laptop (or some spare laptop) to the TV via HDMI. Not sure why you’d need to “hack together” something. A dedicated HTPC is nicer if you want to use IR remotes and the like.

Yeah, perhaps "hack together" is unnecessarily dismissive, but the experience to match is that of a single peripheral to control everything. The other area I have no interest expanding my knowledge into is the minefield of codecs, HDMI cables, GPU and drivers combos to have something outputting HDR and whatever Dolby's flavour of the month proprietary invention I inevitably come across.
Post reply on HN