Google says Nest’s built-in mic not listed in specs was not meant to be secret • Hacker News Board

Re: Google says Nest’s built-in mic not listed in specs was not meant to be secret

#191

Post by atemerev » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 3:43 PM UTC

krapp wrote: post #168

fixermark wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there's one thing we've learned from post-Snowden world, it's that most people don't care enough to dodge the surveillance because most people didn't respond by voluntarily throwing out all their computing devices, smartphones, ISP service plans, etc.

Another thing we've learned from the post-Snowden world is that people invoke the post-Snowden world as an excuse to abandon critical thinking and skepticism and assume all conspiracies are valid, and often don't actually understand what, specifically, Snowden did and didn't demonstrate. People still believe the PRISM program was about companies giving the NSA direct and unlimited backdoor access to their databases,…

Not all conspiracies are valid, however, the particular conspiracy of "NSA covertly uses devices and implants to conduct mass surveillance both in the US and elsewhere, and has special relationships with the largest internet companies including Alphabet" is now quite valid and confirmed. Which means that in cases like that, it should necessarily be considered as a valid concern.

Re: Google says Nest’s built-in mic not listed in specs was not meant to be secret

#192

Post by pornel » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 3:44 PM UTC

strictnein wrote: post #10

Infosec dramas are getting more and more tiresome. Between this and the Singapore Airlines story, it just seems like people need to ratchet everything up to 11. You have two options, choose one: - 1. Google wants to spy on you with a hidden mic - 2. They had future plans for the mic, but it was disabled, so it wasn't mentioned by the marketing department For the Singapore Airlines story, you have two options, choose…

Every small creepy thing can be dismissed, but all these missteps shift the overton window.

- so what it's recording now, it only checks if you're still watching.

- so what they're storing it, the plane is a public place and there are cameras on the airports anyway.

- so what it's uploaded to the cloud, everything is cloud-processed these days.

Re: Google says Nest’s built-in mic not listed in specs was not meant to be secret

#193

Post by perfmode » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 3:49 PM UTC

illumin8 wrote: post #185

userbinator wrote: post #110

Having worked at large companies before, I'm almost certain that more than one person working on the product raised the point "this has a microphone, why isn't it documented?" or "this has privacy implications", but was silenced. (Or it could be that everyone working at Google has been carefully chosen to not have such concerns; I do get that feeling sometimes too.)

Contrast this to Amazon: during design of the original Echo at Lab126, an engineering discussion took place where they determined that implementing the mute function in software would be less expensive in terms of component requirements than implementing a physical disconnect of the mic circuit. The engineering team refused to take the less expensive route, and insisted that the mute button physically disconnect the…

Does this apply to the Sonos one, also? It has Alexa integration, but is a sonos project.

Re: Google says Nest’s built-in mic not listed in specs was not meant to be secret

#194

Post by x38iq84n » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 3:52 PM UTC

illumin8 wrote: post #185

userbinator wrote: post #110

Having worked at large companies before, I'm almost certain that more than one person working on the product raised the point "this has a microphone, why isn't it documented?" or "this has privacy implications", but was silenced. (Or it could be that everyone working at Google has been carefully chosen to not have such concerns; I do get that feeling sometimes too.)

Contrast this to Amazon: during design of the original Echo at Lab126, an engineering discussion took place where they determined that implementing the mute function in software would be less expensive in terms of component requirements than implementing a physical disconnect of the mic circuit. The engineering team refused to take the less expensive route, and insisted that the mute button physically disconnect the…

Good job. Thank you/the team for standing up for good basic principles.

Re: Google says Nest’s built-in mic not listed in specs was not meant to be secret

#195

Post by darkerside » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 3:55 PM UTC

fixermark wrote: post #148

darkerside wrote: post #127

Literally, "Oh, we're sorry. We thought it was obvious we were spying on you by now". Guess their conditioning program isn't yet complete...

When a person hires a personal assistant, the person doesn't generally turn around and accuse the assistant of spying on them because the assistant listens too attentively.

The Nest is not a personal assistant like the Google Home. It's a thermostat.

Re: Google says Nest’s built-in mic not listed in specs was not meant to be secret

#196

Post by illumin8 » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 3:55 PM UTC

perfmode wrote: post #193

illumin8 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Contrast this to Amazon: during design of the original Echo at Lab126, an engineering discussion took place where they determined that implementing the mute function in software would be less expensive in terms of component requirements than implementing a physical disconnect of the mic circuit. The engineering team refused to take the less expensive route, and insisted that the mute button physically disconnect the…

Does this apply to the Sonos one, also? It has Alexa integration, but is a sonos project.

I don't believe this applies to any 3rd party products. Those manufacturers have to make their own design decisions.

Re: Google says Nest’s built-in mic not listed in specs was not meant to be secret

#197

Post by dpark » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 3:56 PM UTC

gcb0 wrote: post #135

dpark wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have some serious enemies, huh?

projecting much? :) I personally agree with the point being afraid of incompetence, not malice.

It’s not as if someone is going to experience a false alarm in their own system, accidentally access your system via a giant security failure and random account mangling, while your system is experiencing a real alarm at the same moment, and then unintentionally silence your alarm. The level of coincidence here is absurd.

The alternative concern that Nest is so incompetent that they somehow issue an automatic silence command (either to all alarms or just yours) seems no more plausible than First Alert being so incompetent that your alarm simply doesn’t work. Especially in combination with the fact that this incompetence must either be undetected permanently (i.e. they always silence your alarm and never notice the horrendous bug) or coincidentally tied to an actual fire in your home, this is probably roughly as likely as a meteorite flattening your house.

The only “viable” concern here is to that an attacker might silence your alarm maliciously, which implies a lot of dedication from an enemy, because they are literally trying to murder you. Presumably this enemy is also an arsonist because otherwise there’s likely no alarm to silence and if there is, it’s likely a false alarm.

Re: Google says Nest’s built-in mic not listed in specs was not meant to be secret

#198

Post by glenrivard » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 3:59 PM UTC

illumin8 wrote: post #185

userbinator wrote: post #110

Having worked at large companies before, I'm almost certain that more than one person working on the product raised the point "this has a microphone, why isn't it documented?" or "this has privacy implications", but was silenced. (Or it could be that everyone working at Google has been carefully chosen to not have such concerns; I do get that feeling sometimes too.)

Contrast this to Amazon: during design of the original Echo at Lab126, an engineering discussion took place where they determined that implementing the mute function in software would be less expensive in terms of component requirements than implementing a physical disconnect of the mic circuit. The engineering team refused to take the less expensive route, and insisted that the mute button physically disconnect the…

Google home uses the same approach with a physical mute button.

How is that in contrast?

Re: Google says Nest’s built-in mic not listed in specs was not meant to be secret

#199

Post by dpark » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 3:59 PM UTC

krapp wrote: post #162

gduplessy wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stick, written weirdly.

No, it's Yiddish parlance for an act, gimmick or commonly employed routine.

That makes no sense in this context. Typo or dictation error (stick -> schtick) makes far more sense.

Re: Google says Nest’s built-in mic not listed in specs was not meant to be secret

#200

Post by randcraw » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 4:00 PM UTC

mrb wrote: post #178

Fun fact: any device with a speaker can be turned into a microphone because a speaker is fundamentally the same thing as a microphone (a membrane connected to a coil/magnet).

Yes, any speaker can become a mic, but only if you plug it into an amp's input channel. Unfortunately for the CIA, they're all plugged into output channels.