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

A sociotechnical threat model for AI-driven smart home devices

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–76 of 76 posts

Re: A sociotechnical threat model for AI-driven smart home devices

#71

Post by newspaper1 »

groundzeros2015 wrote: post #66
newspaper1 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CEOs are not accountable at all. Look at Elon Musk. I don't care what the guy stocking shelves at Walmart does, I do care when billionaires interfere with my life in myriad ways, all of which are nefarious. They can cause infinitely more damage than a low level employee and need infinite more scrutiny because of that.

What has Elon done to you? Other than provide more vehicle and internet choices? Scrutiny and surveillance are not synonyms.

Steal my money, commit the worst securities fraud in history, interfere with my government, promote ultra-right wing racist views… I could go on. He’s truly one of the most heinous people of our time.

Re: A sociotechnical threat model for AI-driven smart home devices

#74

Post by TimByte »

roughly wrote: post #70
esrauch wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, you're going to have to spell out the risk for me here. What other cases have we seen that indicate that mass surveillance via smart speakers is a risk? We all also have phone in my pocket 24/7 and my laptop on my desk, both with microphones in them. In the event of the government doing warrantless spying on all devices it seems like that is a strictly higher ROI target for them?

No, you’re right, we have not seen a case specifically of state surveillance specifically using a smart speaker yet. Re: phones - yes, they’re a strictly higher ROI target, which is why they’re regularly targeted by state-level adversaries, who also seem to enjoy using every other tool and opportunity available to them to surveil and collect data on whoever they’re considering this week’s bete noire, including both w…

[dead]

Re: A sociotechnical threat model for AI-driven smart home devices

#75

Post by esrauch »

roughly wrote: post #70
esrauch wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, you're going to have to spell out the risk for me here. What other cases have we seen that indicate that mass surveillance via smart speakers is a risk? We all also have phone in my pocket 24/7 and my laptop on my desk, both with microphones in them. In the event of the government doing warrantless spying on all devices it seems like that is a strictly higher ROI target for them?

No, you’re right, we have not seen a case specifically of state surveillance specifically using a smart speaker yet. Re: phones - yes, they’re a strictly higher ROI target, which is why they’re regularly targeted by state-level adversaries, who also seem to enjoy using every other tool and opportunity available to them to surveil and collect data on whoever they’re considering this week’s bete noire, including both w…

I'm not trying to agitate you here and won't keep looping on the same question after this reply: I just do not understand the threat model here, and you're still being oblique as though its obvious what the threat model by being sarcastic instead of just spelling it out in plain language.

Are you worried about some foreign state actor like Israel targeting you specifically, hacking your devices to listen to you chatting? Or you're worried about US warrantless mass surveillance wiretapping all citizen's smart speakers, and you're worried the US government may spin up such a program?

In the latter case, the scenario you expect will happen is we'll have ~100 million US households are live wiretapped 24/7 without anyone knowing, you'll be part of the remainder living your life blissfully wiretap-free thanks to not having a smart speaker?

Re: A sociotechnical threat model for AI-driven smart home devices

#76

Post by jdkoeck »

roughly wrote: post #64
reliabilityguy wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a lot of choices between “under the bridge” and “cameras are evil”.

There are indeed a lot of choices for you. Others have fewer choices.

Just look up how cameras give uber drivers protection against wrongful accusations and go off your high horse.
Post reply on HN