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

701–710 of 1001 posts

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

#701

Post by tagrun »

buzer wrote: post #672
Animats wrote: post #572

Here are LG's contract terms for appliances.[1] They are awful. Not only can they listen in. You have a contractual requirement to tell everyone in range of an appliance that they may be eavesdropped upon. CONSENT REQUIREMENT: You acknowledge and agree that it is your sole responsibility to obtain all necessary consents from any third parties whose voices may be captured by the Product and to notify household members…

Is that actually for smart tvs? The first paragraph includes "the products you may access or otherwise connect to via the ThinQ mobile application (not including Smart TVs)" and "These Terms of Use do not apply to any other LG products or services, including Smart Media Products." [EDIT] Smart Media products terms appear to be at https://us.lgappstv.com/main/terms (for comparison here's UK: https://gb.lgappstv.com/ma…

It appears so from the link you provided: https://us.lgappstv.com/main/terms#tabContentTerms6

> 8. I understand that LGE will retain the collected Voice Information for 6 months to fulfil the purposes for which we collected it, and after this period, it will be deleted or anonymized, depending on the case.

> 9. I understand that this Smart Media Product is a household device. If this Smart Media Product will be used by more than one person, I represent that, in addition to agreeing to this Agreement, that I have obtained consent from all other members of my household whose information may be collected through this Smart Media Product and am providing consent on their behalf.

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

#702

Post by mitxela »

phony-account wrote: post #590
Animats wrote: post #572

Here are LG's contract terms for appliances.[1] They are awful. Not only can they listen in. You have a contractual requirement to tell everyone in range of an appliance that they may be eavesdropped upon. CONSENT REQUIREMENT: You acknowledge and agree that it is your sole responsibility to obtain all necessary consents from any third parties whose voices may be captured by the Product and to notify household members…

And yet what lawmakers focused on was getting your consent for a cookie on a website you were only going to visit once.

The exact same law says LG TVs can't record you without consent. Do you like the law or not?

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

#703

Post by mitxela »

scoot wrote: post #447
josuepeq wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s okay to be a luddite. Not everything needs to have an interface. Got into a spat with a manager at my apartment complex because I refused to install their app just to deal with a maintenance issue. He was like, “I don’t see the problem, you have to use the Latch app to open your apartment door.” To which I replied, “No, I have the door keypad code memorized.” Just like I don’t need an app to make a log of exit/e…

> you have to use the Latch app to open your apartment door So what happens if you arrive home with a dead phone? And possibly worse, they have a log of when you come and go?

> And possibly worse, they have a log of when you come and go?

Most apartment buildings in the US already use face-tracking cameras to get this log

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

#704

Post by mitxela »

tosti wrote: post #586
devmor wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My apartment complex came to install keypads and centrally managed smart thermostats and I would not let them. Thankfully my lease was old enough that I was able to argue against it. I don’t want a 3rd party company tracking my habits, and I don’t want some manager boiling my pets alive while I’m gone because they decided they think our AC is set too low.

You got lucky. If you've got an apartment in, say, a healthcare facility, they'll install those thermostats and whatnot. Usually the neighbours are clueless about technology so complaining doesn't get very far at all. It's even worse if some staff wrote paranoid in your file, 'cause they'll argue it's good for "exposure".

You mean if you are permanently resident in a mental institute they don't let you control the temperature? That's hardly surprising...

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

#705

Post by mitxela »

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.

You can do that too. You can show up, represent yourself and pay a few hundred dollar court fee, while the big company has to waste hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend themselves from you. You'll probably lose the case if you don't have a lawyer, but in a place like the US, you don't have to pay the other side's legal fees unless the case is frivolous (which it won't be).

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

#706

Post by mitxela »

II2II wrote: post #523
Sophira wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, you're not crazy. I'm also someone who actually reads terms documents, because I find that they're often the only thing that will be truthful about a company's intentions. And keeping it completely disconnected from the internet should be the default, in my opinion.

> I find that they're often the only thing that will be truthful about a company's intentions. Really? Many years ago, I had to physically sign a license with Microsoft to obtain some software. The license was not consistent with the license included with the software. Both licenses effectively said they were the real license and that any other agreement you made with Microsoft was not valid. I don't think there was…

I guess neither is valid then, you got the software for free.

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

#707

Post by mitxela »

brookst wrote: post #313
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

That is not how AirTags work. They do not reach out to Apple servers at all. AirTags broadcast an encrypted ID. Phones build lists of ID’s they’ve seen and send the list to Apple. There is no routing, no ability to send arbitrary data, no active communication of any sort. It’s not a mesh network. The link you posted makes that pretty clear.

That's functionally the exact same thing, and if they wanted to send data they could encode it in the "ID".

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

#708

Post by mitxela »

opello wrote: post #534
ProllyInfamous wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm still nervously holding my breath for the first disclosure that a TV manufacturer is using Amazon's distributed Sidewalk Network (or perhaps mobile vehicles, cell-SIMs, LoRa) to remotely gather all that viewing data they've subsidized into your artificially-low TV purchase price . But they've been calling "crazy?" for decades.

This exactly. Surely some sort of IoT mesh networking will allow exfiltration of data even without having configured your own device. I'm hopeful that there will be sufficient distrust that "jailbreaking" or "rooting" TV controller boards will be turnkey enough to move to something like OpenWrt or GrapheneOS but for TVs.

Why not do it yourself?

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

#709

Post by mitxela »

dataflow wrote: post #448
jandrese wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because you didn't allow it on your local WiFi doesn't mean it did not connect to the Internet. Your neighbors might have a guest WiFi it can use. Or maybe it has a built-in cell modem. Your data is valuable, there's reason to put effort into getting it.

Wouldn't using a neighbor's Wi-Fi without anyone's permission or instruction violate CFAA or some other law? Also, wouldn't this be trivial to test by just setting up your own network and seeing if the TV connects?

Using internet access doesn't seem to be illegal. If there's no password you can't even argue it was protected. Residential proxies are legal too (as they should be - fuck cloudflare).

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

#710

Post by Melatonic »

theshrike79 wrote: post #319
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,…

Apple TV is the best one. No ads, full OS updates for a long time.

The better Roku hardware I would say is a second best - you can block the as servers fairly easily and then you do have to disable all the crap on the homescreen.
Post reply on HN