RU version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
64% Positive
Analyzed from 2950 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#smart#internet#data#wifi#driver#tvs#device#don#connect#more
Discussion (84 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
They're not talking about putting the TV online. The TV is completely offline.
They're talking about plugging the TV into a PC or laptop via HDMI or Displayport (like if you're running an HTPC), which then triggers a companion app update on the PC via Windows Update. This was a news item a few weeks ago with their monitors. They then also discuss a hardware blocker for HDMI or DP to prevent this.
Again, this has nothing to do about the TV's smart apps.
It's very reminiscent of Sony putting rootkits on CD's. Unwanted, dangerous software is being loaded onto your computer by people you paid money to. The companies involved, including MS, should face serious blowback over this, as Sony did.
Definitely have to agree with the author on that. Only use for a TV for me is for playing on the Steam Machine.
Once awareness of this side-loaded crapware gets out, I'd expect the community to come up with fixes to ensure it doesn't get loaded. In the meantime, this should blow up in the faces of MS, LG, etc. just like things blew up for Sony when they put root-kits on CD's.
Doesn't solve the malware on Windows PCs installed by LG monitors problem. My only solution to that remains to not buy Lucky Goldstar ever since their 14" 640x480 VGA monitor died inside of warranty but they refused to fix it.
But I have a thousand times more confidence that MS will keep the signed, auto-distributed periodic xbox series x operating system updates 'secure' than I do that some random smart tv manufacturer will implement a proper operating system.
The exact same logic applies to devices you buy. These companies have shown they do not have any integrity. So why would you want buy something from them that is "smart" and never sleeps?
That is just stupid to give internet access to a "smart" tv or a "smart" phone. You have zero control over it.
On a related note, you should absolutely remove the cellular modem from your car as well.
The geniuses at hyundai refuse to let you operate the heating in some of their electric cars without an internet connection. Yes, you read that right - the only way to operate the HVAC compressor in several hyundai EVs is via their stupid app and the internet. I found out the hard way when i kept noticing that my hyundai EV was not heating the cabin in winter even though i turned the HAVC on. Turns out, as soon as you plug into the wall outlet, the compressor stops.
There is no technical reason for this, other than enshittification.
We collected such minimal information. Basically only enough to allow for OTAs, functionality, and debugging. Thinking back, we could've collected so much more.
I remember when Alexa hit the market and we (as a company) thought there's NO WAY amazon was making any money on them.
Today... NO WAY. Along the way the value stopped being "This product is priced so we can make a profit" and became "The data we collect is more valuable than the sale".
The smart here really isnt the issue.
You can do things like physically modifying your TV, or seeing if there are undocumented settings to disable things.
The traffic was separated so that anything on the public hotspot was not attributed to the private subscriber network.
Secondly for years I lived somewhere very remote so that meant that hardly anyone ever got to use my broadband connection via such a hotspot, but I got to use hundreds of other peoples hotspots when I was somewhere less isolated.
I was quite happy to opt in to this system as I benefitted hugely from it.
How does this work legally when you get in trouble for someone else's activity?
Is this for real? This does not affect me as I use my own equipment, but I still find it hard to believe.
Instructions for disabling it: https://www.xfinity.com/support/articles/disable-xfinity-wif...
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/comcasts-new-neighborh...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xfinity#Xfinity_WiFi
Every Cox customer has a Panoramic WiFi router that advertises as a member of the “CoxWiFi” SSID, and other customers can authenticate there and access the Internet through your connection. This is on a strictly opt-out basis.
I’ve opted-out, and also my router is permanently in Bridge Mode, so there is no technical way for me to provide anyone a WiFi connection. But all my neighbors do, even if they are blissfully unaware.
You might say it's naive, but is it really naive to buy a TV and expect it to be a device to display audiovisual content and not a spyware/adware machine?
I feel like it's not the user's behavior that should be put into question here, but the borderline criminal behavior of the manufacturer.
And so your TV does need Internet access.
The same holds for many other devices, in different shapes. Sure, you can opt out of civilization completely to avoid all the side effects of late stage capitalism, but maybe it's worth applying a bit more nuanced thinking to find a balance that doesn't throw you back to the 1800s. (Unless you like the 1800s, in which case, enjoy)
Linux mini-PC running Bigscreen Plasma. No, it can't be used to stream Netflix at native resolution because of DRM. But if you can't live without Netflix content, you can use alternative sources and save money in the process. VacuumTube for YT instead of the official app.
Yes, this is an additional device, but it is not unlike a streaming stick or Android shitbox.
At this point I assume the author was making intentionally bad choices out of morbid curiosity. I can't imagine anyone technical thinking drivers should be required to connect to a TV via HDMI. (or maybe I'm not technical enough)
There's no reason to expect a normal user to think "Yes, this port is the USB port and thus commonly needs driver updates, but that HDMI port does not ever need driver updates." Most people don't even know it's called a USB port, let alone whether it should host driver updates. Besides, I could imagine a scenario where there's some outdated HDMI decoding thing on it. Or maybe just some tech for home theater stuff I'm not aware of.
[Sceptre](https://www.sceptre.com/TV/4K-UHD-TV-category1category73.htm...)'s 4K series is sold at Wal-Mart, often for under half the web-listed prices. I’ve bought a few at the 42” scale for like $180 shipped. They’re fine and they’re incapable of all the spyware bullshit.
If the user data is worth that much then I wouldn't be surprised if some manufacturers put such radios in their non-smart TVs in order to try and gather such data.
I live in a densely populated part of a large UK city and (checks `nmcli dev wifi list`) there are 14 distinct wireless networks near me that aren't mine. There's a good chance that any IOT device could find something nearby, and there's even a whole load of LoRa nodes that it could use for a very slow uplink.
[edit: or whatever UK FCC would be]
I don't know where you are, so I can't say what availability is like there. But it's worth doing a basic search.
Smart TVs are to be plugged in to be updated, and that's it.
Their default state is to be permanently offline.
Hook up an Apple TV if you want apps.
Your statement is false. There are reasons to update.
Just disconnecting from Wifi often doesn't work because the TV will connect to insecure wifi to upload data and fingerprint what you're watching and who you are.
It made more sense when I first heard this theorized back in the early 2010s when smart TVs were becoming more common and unsecured WiFi hadn't vanished completely yet. Now it would be way more logical to include a cheap 5g radio, which has also been alleged but I haven't seen any model shown to include one.
You can argue if it actually installs the software or just nags the user to install it, but neither are things microsoft would allow a monitor "driver" to do if they had any integrity.
What is it talking about? What boom?
If anything it's the opposite, as memory components become obscenely expensive.
Checks out, and I mean that in the kindest way possible
The malware installed by LG on Microsoft PCs and the spying by smart TVs are both despicable. But I couldn’t get through this article.
Even if they were convenient shenanigans, in the longer term:
Political action > Purchasing Choices > Individual modifications
A non-cohesive angry rant
> Hah! I don't have to worry about this! I got Linux! For now.. That's true. But EDID transmission still happens
EDID transmission is how monitors communicate their specs to the computer, how is that an issue?
In fact, EDID transmission is one of the reasons you can plug a monitor into your computer and have it "just work", without needing to install additional proprietary drivers (why do this?)
> But what stops LG from convincing the Ubuntu maintainers to make an LG variant of their supposed driver to magically appear in your snap or apt package repository? You hope to God they don't, but the danger is always there.
So the whole argument there is that yes, it is safe, but there exists a nonzero possibility that it won't be in the future? Couldn't the author have just written "this is not an issue on linux" and saved paragraphs of breathless purple prose?
The 2nd story is crazy - I wonder if I hack LG and start downloading all their trade secrets, when caught, the government would just let me stop the download and face no punishment, if I say I just forgot to ask them for consent. Or maybe it's different if I do the hacking through a backdoored cable I sell them, like they hack us through backdoored TVs.
[1] https://inews.co.uk/news/technology/how-to-stop-google-from-...
[2] https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/smart-tvs-that-send-data-wit...
Connect a mini-PC to provide any "smarts" required.