Tech enthusiast:"My entire house is smart! Everything is connected to the cloud, automated, and I can control every appliance from my phone!"
Tech worker / Software engineer:"The only piece of technology in my house is a printer from 2004, and I keep a loaded gun next to it in case it makes a noise I don't recognize."
I hope its just a retry loop and not actually data.
Sales Engineers (another type of SE) are all the way in on LLMs to help them do unnatural things with the products they are trying to sell. I apologize in advance for this.
> Tech enthusiast:"My entire house is smart! Everything is connected to the cloud, automated, and I can control every appliance from my phone!"
> Tech worker / Software engineer:"The only piece of technology in my house is a printer from 2004, and I keep a loaded gun next to it in case it makes a noise I don't recognize."
> Doubtful they just unboxed, plugged in, and it connected to the right AP and went
Why not? iirc some of the smart TVs have been shown to find open wifi networks on their own and upload data. (I'm not sure about that though. But it's plausible and undoubtedly will be implemented some day).
I've read this argument dozens of times on HN and on HN only - I'd love to see an example of that actually provably happening anywhere in the real world.
I would love to as well. It sounds like something that's plausible but potentially a minefield of liability for the manufacturer.
I could also see some kind of partnership with ISPs to use their "public" WiFi hotspots[1]. This seems more likely since it's (probably) harder to honeypot but requires making regional deals.
Well, yeah sorta since the only reason appliances connect to the internet is to steal data. I mean, if you buy a connected x that normally would not be connected, it’s 99 percent there to do nefarious stuff for its real owners. It’s like having a pet lion. Sure, it’s horribly irresponsible that someone sold you a pet lion, but. Uuuh you bought at pet lion. What did you think it was going to do?
How does this analogy go when people buy a house kitten and it turns out they have been sold a lion cub? Most people simply do not have the tech literacy to understand that what they a are buying is actually a lion, they thought they were buying a coffeemaker with some cool features. It's difficult to blame the victim when they would need to spend hours trying to understand why the thing mapping out their local network is something that they should even care about
In the analogy, there is no such thing as a house kitten. They are all cute and cuddly lion cubs. Society needs to develop a deep awareness of this, in spite of the ocean of fraudulent advertising to the contrary. (individual-liberty-protecting regulation like the GDPR would be nice too, alas)
Since most appliances now contain a general-purpose computer, it would be unfair to say that a device is incapable of hacking or hosting malware, because any device with the given sensors and radios and capabilities can be essentially reprogrammed at any time.
So, if we're looking at smart TVs with cameras and microphones and Wi-Fi and Bluetooth and all the connectors, or if we're simply looking at a an ordinary network device, they all fall under the umbrella of general purpose computer, and there is no way to trust their maker, or some equally capable programmer, not to turn them malevolent in some future update.
I don't view this as an issue of terms of service or of software or of your manufacturer. I view this as an existential and fundamental problem with dropping general purpose computers into your home and behind your DMZ.
Consumer operating systems like Windows and Apple have all kinds of countermeasures against this malicious use. But without the proper introspection and without the proper safeguards, a device that looks special purpose but is in fact general purpose is far more dangerous.
Getting technical - the way I see it, the problem arises from a combination of three things - sensors/access, Internet access, and source of software/authority.
Sensors/access is unavoidable, otherwise the device doesn't actually do anything useful. The point is it sets the scope for what the device is able to affect. When people say "set up a separate IoT VLAN" (that still has Internet access) this is basically what they're addressing - how a device can access other devices they may care about more.
Internet access is the catalyst that's created this whole dumpster fire - I don't care about the proprietary software on my keyboard/mouse/UPS/monitor/GPU/etc to nearly the same extent. I've got some TP-Link plugs that I control local network only. They don't get Internet access, so no updates, telemetry backhaul, etc.
The authority to update/configure/change that software is the crux. With proprietary software, there are no cuddly kittens period. Here we've got a case of a "legitimate" company choosing to be a bona fide attacker to increase their bottom line! The harm was exacerbated by a bug causing it to run amok, but even without the bug they are deliberately violating trust.
But even libre software can fall to security holes as well. Meaning you want to centralize the attack surface as much as possible, for administration's sake of keeping updated. "Internet" of things is basically the direct opposite of this - postulating many illegible fine-grained links between devices on different networks. Whereas really need more like the Home Assistant model, where peripheral devices may communicate over the network, but it's only ever over the local network. Think how ethernet is set up when used in industrial control networks (or at least how it should be set up, hehe).
In that context the person is a fool who shouldn’t be in charge of another life, because they’re incapable of basic prudence.
I don’t actually think that applies to coffee makers spying on people though. People shouldn’t be expected to understand how computer networks or ad tech spying works in the same way that literally any child or idiot should know the difference between a lion cub and a house cat.
How do you feel about thermostats? Are some things worth it? I've had a "smart" one for the past five years, part of a new furnace install, that I've stubbornly refused to connect to my wifi. Of course this means if we forget to turn the heat down while no one's home, there's nothing to be done about it.
Maybe that's why I've never heard of the company here in Germany.
That, plus nobody in their right mind would buy American (vs French, Italian, German, Dutch...) when it comes to coffee. (yes, Starbucks is a thing here, but I'd argue people who are into _coffee_ don't go there, people go there for other reasons.)
Tongue-in-cheek, but my Moccamaster which I bought second-hand is still doing great after 15 years. Two deep cleaning sessions in all that time and just running it with vinegar a couple of times a year seems to be all it needs.
The device is dead simple. No advanced electronics. Nothing complex that can break. Just a coffee maker fine-tuned to near perfection.
The only flaw it has is the handle for the pot. I've resorted to replacing the plastic handle with a fancy walnut one I made myself. I needed that because we tilt the pot sideways to fill the reservoir with water (because of the placement on the kitchen counter and the cabinets above), and that plastic handle is not designed for sideways stresses.
You shouldn’t fill the reservoir with the coffee pot, unless you’re really washing the pot super clean after each use. Better get a proper jug for filling the reservoir, so you’re not putting coffee residue and oils back into the clean-water system.
To me, this is begging for a class-action lawsuit.
Yeah, sure, the terms of service probably say that they can do that. That's still in "unconscionable" territory. And courts do not like unconscionable contracts. If it's unconscionable, it's invalid (if I understand the law correctly).
Is this why everybody wants to make appliances with wireless?
Yes, this is why everybody wants to make vehicles and refrigerators and thermostats and ereaders with cellular and/or wireless: subscription revenue from bulk data purchasers of what their scans reveal. IIRC Amazon was an industry leader in this space by showing book authors what page you stopped reading on, and then bulk assessing that data at scale to estimate which sentence or word; of course, Google’s Android remains the most successful at-scale deployment of data collection for advertisers worldwide. See also, for recent context, the top comment (and others) of the LG Smart TV problem (30 days ago, 1012 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49592375
Funny thing, that. Go into an electronics store now and pay attention to the TV boxes and the printer boxes. The amount of crazy fine print on both of them now is absurd. The printer boxes all now have lots of fine print about the various ink protection and DRM schemes and subscription services, the TV boxes have everything ranging from binding arbitration on the box (LG) to "(brand) accounts are REQUIRED to use this TV" (Visio).
Customers are gonna get lost in the sauce and skip right past all of that and toss the packaging.
"Is this why everybody wants to make appliances with wireless?"
Which raises in my mind the obvious defense, which is that if you try to put four or five of these devices on your network they'll be too busy interfering with each other for them to actually spy on anything.
Let the wiretaps wiretap the wiretaps. Keeps 'em busy, makes 'em feel like they're doing something important.
> What is my purpose?
You wiretap the wiretaps wiretapping our wiretaps.
> Oh my god.
I don’t dispute the purpose of the data collection, but I can’t believe this quantity of data collection is intentional.
There’s no way Keurig is has the intention of paying the kind of costs required to collect a terabyte of data every two weeks for millions of people who own their coffee makers.
There must be some kind of bug here. I imagine if you unplugged it and plugged it in again the data usage would settle down.
I was thinking that repeated small probes add up quicker than you'd expect. But this is ~1.1MB/sec, which still seems a few orders of magnitude off.
Now I'm left wondering what this traffic actually is - assuming probe (arp/icmp) packet size of 64 byte, that's 17kpps. I don't think an ESP32 class Internet-of-Trash chip can even do that. Even bulk transfers rather than small probes would be pushing it.
Perhaps this thing found some fellow-traveler device streaming video on a port it happened to connected to?
... the linked xit says it "broadcast 1TB of data". So maybe some protocol with a much larger packet than icmp, spammed in a hard loop without any delay?
As article says, the coffee machine didn't 'collect' or phone home a TB of data. It just saturated the local network looking for data to collect. This doesn't cost Keurig or any other IoT device company a single cent. It might have been a bug, or maybe not. Without some bad press, like this post; they have no incentive to change anything
Oh let's be charitable! A parameter measured in ms is mistakenly thought be measured in s. Hilarity ensues.
Real world example: þe Windows registry DWORD time periods seems to invite 10^-3s granularity for totally inappropriate timescales. Perhaps its considered a "best practice" by the dick heads that decide to do these things, who knows? Why bother considering how a sysadmin might actually want to use the knobs and dials and what is an appropriate value for a parameter.
I could probably find a better example but this is recent: Smoothwall has an agent (IDEX) that you install on a Windows domain controller and one of its functions can be to harvest DHCP data and pass it onto the firewall so that it can track sessions. The upload period is a registry DWORD value.
I fixed a "problem" by stopping IDEX trying to upload data a thousand times per second. I will also point out that switching on this functionality and the periodicity setting is only applied by editing the registry - there is no GUI for this. The dReal world example -ocs are clear that you should initially set 1000 as the period.
For me that sort of thing comes under the heading of "you are holding it wrong", potential victim shaming and rubbish engineering.
Not making an accusation, but it reminds me of a chat transcript oddity I saw while using opencode back in August. It replace a syllable of a word with a punctuation mark that has the same pronunciation or HTML entity. It was something like "...the &litude of that waveform..." but I can't remember exactly, nor which model I was using. I just noticed it and thought, that's weird. A few days later I read about text watermarking and figured it may be that.
Happens on paid too. Every once in a while, one of my conversation names will have random Chinese characters in them. I guess distillation goes both ways.
This is what I suspect. A retry every X milliseconds actually being used against a variable nanoseconds, a broken loop condition that ends up always retrying, something like that.
I don't understand giving the benefit of the doubt to a company that is actively spying on its customers, which in some jurisdictions would be illegal.
All these companies make their money as 'feeders' to the advertising industry, they just sell a different device to consumers in order to achieve it.
Selling devices to consumers is a solved problem. The problem we're currently trying optimise solutions for is selling consumers to the advertising companies.
Maybe they literally just don't care about how much traffic they put on your network. Maybe the thought is "1 tb of traffic internally is very low utilization of the network over the course of a month".
Whatever they're trying to accomplish with these scans would probably be impeded in some way by this much volume. Like it'd compete with the link it's using to phone home or overload whatever on-device processing it does with that data. The man in the article who discovered this called it a bug, I agree with him.
When the cost of the action to you is 0, why not do it as fast and as frequently as possible until you get your intended benefit.
Even the act of engineering rate limiting costs you more than just having this run wild over your customers networks because the vast majority of people buying these machines do not have the inclination or skills to detect this activity.
It's impossible to tell the difference between being malicious and being ignorant.
With this particular company, everything else they do is malicious so I won't ever give them the benefit of the doubt.
I tried to use a reusable pod in one of their machines the other day and when I shut it the handle broke off leaving me rather confused. Turns out in the closing head of the machine they stuck in 4 big metal spikes to destroy anything put in there. There is absolutely no reason to do this, none, other than being dicks. Had to get out the epoxy and repair the handle of a friends machine.
Exactly. The whole thing is weird and creepy and wrong.
I understand why a TV would keep track of what I’m watching so they can sell the data. I think it should be illegal. It’s horrible. My TV isn’t connected. But the reason they would do it fits in my brain. I can see how they got there.
How a coffee machine got to running network probes… nothing. It seems like some sort of Internet of Things DEFCON presentation topic made up by putting random words together.
So to think that on top of that they were purposefully causing so much traffic on the local network is just a few steps too far for me to think that part was intentional.
I think the reason to use a coffee machine is because it's an innocent device that doesn't require any data whatsoever, so nobody would ever suspect it of something so nefarious.
They're explicitly taking advantage of their customers' trust, and deserve to go bankrupt.
The funny part is that the manufactures shitty QA made this a much bigger thing that it could have been. Had the machine done a scan once every week, which is more than enough for their purpose, diffed the result locally and pushed the few kB of data to the internet, then no one would have noticed anything.
Yes, it's malicious and completely unnecessary, but incompetence has potentially made it a PR problem.
I was talking to the guy who used to run our ITSM system at work. He said a team was trying to query the system 10x per second to check for updates, which was causing performance issues. Assuming it was a bug, he went to the team to have them tone it down. He was shocked when they fought with him over it. It was working as designed and they didn't want to check less frequently, despite there being no logical reason to do this.
This may be working exactly as designed, as it costs them effectively nothing to constantly scan.
I mean, it wasn't clear to me without the explanation (I too thought it used 1TB of public internet data), but it's clear now that it is accurate (it literally used 1 TB of private network data)
It might not seem to be anything (people will assume private network traffic is free) but there is a cost - it's capacity that could be used for other purposes, eg. home alarms.
local area network traffic was sent out and received by the device to the tune of 1TB of traffic. not internet data but local area network data which is not ideal for a coffee machine either way you slice it. if it were some kind of local bonjour or whatever the open standard is called service that was just alerting the network of their name it would be understandable but the coffee maker is streaming the equivalent of about 17 high def movies every day to the local network.
Here that means no lawyers, no discovery, $100 to file in plain language, and a company employee (not a company lawyer, or a contractor, or a temp employee) must attend or they default.
$15k damages.
Reasons it could happen? Imagine grandpa has a tech come out 4 times, because his network is super slow. EG, this thing pounding his wifi for its scans.
Grandpa gets his money back. The company? Well, it has to spend money talking to a lawyer, because even though a lawyer can't attend small-claims court, they still consult.
They also have to send an employee to small-claims court, just have to deal with it. In the end it costs the company thousands of dollars maybe even over ten grand. It costs you a hundred bucks and you get your money back. That sort of asymmetry is beautiful, and if everybody availed themselves in small claims court, it would be far better than any class action lawsuit.
Grandpa is definitely not getting $15k in damages, and Keurig can deal with this with their in house lawyer that they're already paying a salary for. They're definitely not shelling out big bucks here. It'd be cheaper for them to let the default judgement happen than to actually show up.
In which case, your grandpa gets his money back, plus filing costs, plus serving costs, and if it's a default judgement, no one to argue against the gas costs, and time costs you tack on.
Please show me how this is suboptimal? Especially with LLMs to write the demand letter, and walk you through the process.
And 'using their in house lawyer' still has time cost, as does dealing with the routing and pondering the service letter. And accounting paying up. There is no aspect of your 'worst case' where it's bad. It's still all pluses. And if as I suggest, lots and lots of people do it, then they end up with a loss on that product.
If each case is $1000, or even $500 payout, how much profit does that take? Profit on 100 units? 50? If a product is horrifically bad, and everyone runs to small claims court, that's disaster for a company.
I'm not saying any of this is bad at all. I'm saying you can't expect the $15k damages you mentioned in your post that I first replied to. It won't cost Keurig anywhere near that even with fees and such. That's why I quoted it specifically in both of my comments.
> If each case is $1000, or even $500 payout
How many people are going to spend $500 on service techs coming out to their house? So far we've got a report from one guy who figured it out with no damages at all, and therefore no case for a small claims court. Since it was found to be defective 10 days after first use, it's probably still eligible to be returned for a refund, so even the cost of the machine isn't eligible.
> If a product is horrifically bad, and everyone runs to small claims court, that's disaster for a company
This much I can agree with for sure. While it is definitely bad, I don't think flooding small claims courts is going to be a viable strategy in this particular case.
One thing that confuses me is, well, at this point in the data collection game, is there still value in this 'local' data? I mean, everyone is doing it, collecting the same data - hasn't that decreased the value? Obviously not, but I still wonder.
If there's one thing you can be absolutely certain of it's that every scrap of the data they collect is either making companies money hand over fist or they strongly believe that it will soon. No company is going to bother collecting, storing, (hopefully securing), backing up, and analyzing all this data without a reason, and to them money and power are the only reasons that matter.
Right now companies are somewhat limited in how much use they can get out their horde of private and personal information, but AI is changing that rapidly. As long as you don't mind a huge rate of error (and companies don't because it all becomes "good enough" at a large enough scale) it's basically perfect for the task of digging through endless amounts of information and spewing out bullet points.
Ha. I feel like you have never worked for a large company if you think they are making rational decision at all. They may “believe” this will make them money, but there is no guarantee that this isn’t just costing them money hand over fist.
Not in my house. What is even the point of connecting a coffee machine or a washing machine to the internet? I think my washing machine advertised that I could download new washing cycle programs in the app. Who on earth cares?
Of course you can set up firewalls and VLANs to have the best of both worlds. You can remotely interact with an IoT device like this to set them off or check the status, but the device itself can't see anything else on the local network.
I have all of my IoT devices on separate Wifi network(s) and VLANs and almost all of them are isolated so they can't talk to each other, plus I occasionally look at how much data they are sending/receiving from the Internet (some is expected obviously, and it differs by device).
Doing this requires a considerable amount of admin work and IT knowledge though. It also requires something a step above most consumer grade or supplier provided networking equipment.
I've never spotted anything egregious like the coffee maker in the OP but if I did I'd be making sure other people knew about it and the device itself is either firewalled off properly or replaced by a brand that isn't a security risk.
> Doing this requires a considerable amount of admin work...
As someone who has done this, it's a one-time cost (as long as you're not the sort who simply can't stop tinkering with it and ends up totally rebuilding it like once a quarter (don't ask me how I know)) and -if you have even just a shaky understanding of how to do it- it's not _that_ large of a cost.
> ...and IT knowledge though.
I definitely agree that doing this requires quite a bit of IT knowledge... but it's all stuff that's pretty easily learnable for anyone who's interested in technical stuff and/or technically-inclined.
For folks who are looking to do this on their home LAN, I have some hardware manufacturer recommendations:
All of this VLAN work will be entirely pointless if your switches can't be programmed to enforce the separation, so one will need "managed" switches of some kind. I'd recommend anyone who wants to try to do this to have a look at Mikrotik switches... they are inexpensive and definitely more than good enough for a fancy home LAN.
Mikrotik also sells routers and WiFi APs. I can't comment on the quality, as I have slapped together my own router PC and use OpenWRT Ones for my APs... but I've found their switches to be more than good enough for my fancy home LAN. Perhaps their routers and AP are equally good?
Mikrotik publishes pretty comprehensive documentation here [0]. If you want to dick around with the Mikrotik management CLI for RouterOS -which is their name for their fancy management software- you can install the x86 version of RouterOS in a VM by booting a VM from one of the x86 install images at [1]. They also have a much simpler management software that you can run on all of their switches called "SwOS" -documented here [2]- but that doesn't have any x86 installation media so you can't play with it on your PC.
That's obviously bad and I hate it, but how much value even is there is the data that a spyware coffee machine could collect about your home? What advertisers would buy such data and what would they advertise to me? What is the marginal value of that data?
Knowing what TV you own, what phone models are used in your house, and what other devices you own tells advertisers about your spending patterns and income.
I wonder if you can identify the age of devices based just on network scans? Like if an advertiser can tell I've got a washing machine model that was last sold 7 years ago, it's time to spam me with washing machine ads.
Quite probably. nmap does (or certainly used to) have options to report the OS of a given machine had based on various quirks of the packets it got back from them. It was disturbingly accurate at times. You put that together with banner messages from running services, MAC addresses, responses to broadcast packets, deliberate probing, and the number of devices you _can't_ remotely identify on a network without actually logging into them is probably very small.
It's a lot easier to create an embedding with equivalent information than to reliably identify a particular device, and that embedding is more than sufficient to enable targeting.
I love that a poor, stupid man like me is being targeted by teams of the smartest data analytics professionals on the planet.
Makes me think of DraftKings. You take your average 20 something sports fan - drinking beer, watching the game. And, on the other end of that smartphone display exist some of the most complex algorithms ever designed by teams of mathematics / statistics PhDs and it's deliberately built around targeting... this one guy from Florida who is pretty sure his team will be up by 7 at halftime.
Maybe it's more of a morbid joke, but it makes me laugh to think about.
This does seem to be true in the age of throwing all data in to training the next iteration of the God Machine, but also, some data is a lot more valuable than other data and I want to know what the incentives are of people who are collecting data in our homes and what the actual data / derived data that they're after.
big thing is to be able to serve ads more effectively
so if you know that a user is having an affair, you might want to serve divorce lawyer ads (I'd imagine those are very expensive) or something.
this kind of data though is just like a cog in the machine, but it can e.g. give enough info to know how many people likely are in that household, and so on. useful when combined with other signals
If it scans the network and sees a smart dishwasher, smart washer/drier, and smart lights, but no smart fridge, I imagine its worth something to a company like Samsung to start targeting that customer with ads for a smart fridge.
You can also map a home out depending on signal strength. That gives you approximate size of home which gives you approximate income.
It can also correlate it with geolocation data. Google, for eg, sniffs all broadcasted SSIDs with their StreetView cars. If you can pick up on a SSID (or any of the MAC addresses of the other devices), you can buy the data set that includes it which further pinpoints demographics given the neighborhood AMI.
You can also build behavioral profiles patterns based on things like, for eg, if a baby monitor model is present or a robot vacuum, if certain devices only connect at certain times, etc.
I think the general rule for adtech is that profile guesstimates just need to be around 70%+ fidelity to determine if a sale can be made.
Lastly, you can also just sell the data on the gray market. The more datapoints, the higher the price. Most consumer product companies do that since we have little-to-no data privacy laws and the people who seem the most aware of it also are generally very apathetic and disinterested in advocating for them.
Yeah, it definitely makes sense to me if what adtech is often doing is just backing out from specific data to a general profile like income, location, etc, so that that level of targeting can work.
For example, your aged mother's phone will get pinged within X meters of an urgent-care facility, or she'll do some web-search about "hip pain", and then all the adult children start getting ads about elderly-parent-care.
Or perhaps the pervy-panopticon decides some phone-on-wifi events look like adultery, and both suppposed spouses start getting ads for divorce lawyers, private investigators, or track-covering products. (Bonus if certain specialized "adult" toys are detected on Wifi or Bluetooth...)
It’s not so hard to get root shell on some routers via the admin panel, which usually has the same password as the wifi network or a default password. From there the device can capture dns logs.
They can get a profile of when you're in which room, how many people are in the house, etc. That's useful for targeting (e.g., up at 5am, leaves, comes back in an hour or two will have you profiled (more complicated than this since it's usually a fuzzy vector thing, but for the sake of argument) as somebody who goes to the gym, maybe leading to creatine advertising or other whatever), and also for attribution (e.g., a TV ad is shown, somebody gets up, and a purchase is made from a device known to exist at that household, regardless of whether it's behind a VPN).
If you have even very crude data from somewhere else for the targeting, improvements in attribution tech are actually the more important factor. The adtech company mostly doesn't even care who you are, just whether the ad turned into a purchase or not, and that's where a lot of the invasive tracking comes from. They'd be perfectly happy with a quickly changing "identity" if they knew it was reliable and stable between ad and purchase.
That new Amazon page that shows you what it has inferred about you told my friend that he “clips [his] fingernails approximately every two months.” He makes extensive and enthusiastic use of Echo products in his household, but I have no idea how it could've possibly reached that conclusion (and neither does he!).
No one cares. There’s little serious pushback to privacy invasions by big tech. Flock cameras have been a rare exception. Half the people “have nothing to hide” and half aren’t willing to give up the convenience that the popular app or gadget gives them.
I'm convinced this is the state because people don't know the implications and scale of the privacy invasion. The flock camera incident shows that when people can sense, understand and feel the impact they don't like it. If we pose it as they are selling network data, nobody minds, if we pose it as they are selling your identity on the internet people get uncomfortable. But its hard to convince people of the latter. Mostly because nothing big happens due to big data breaches as someone on HN was remarking recently. Additionally, I think people have resigned to the status quo as they think that is the only way they can get their gadgets for cheap. That is just not true, companies can still make a profit without being predatory. Its just that it will not be the maximum profit.
Part of the problem is most people don't have an idea of what's being collected.
With just a little bit of interaction with the modern internet, the profiles created are stunningly accurate. Age, gender, political ideology, favorite food, relationship status, how many kids you have.
All this stuff gets slowly collected, aggregated and shared amongst data brokers.
People would care so much more if they knew just how invasive advertising actually is. All to try and convince you to drink one more coke or grab one more cheeseburger.
You can’t realistically stop this. The industry is international and any interaction being shared across companies allows you to build this profile. It’s impossible to be fully private while having the openness of our internet interactions. You can try to limit the implications but that’s it
I don't truly understand what you are suggesting here. None of these interactions need to be recorded by anyone. You definitely don't need to sell that data.
You don't need a new toilet seat? But you just looked at toilet seats and then bought one. Are you sure you don't need another? Don't you like toilet seats?
I see this as a failure of news media. Specially tragic as they don't even recognize this as their duty. Their reporting is almost always single data points. They don't make the overall picture clear when reporting this stuff. Imagine if the financial crisis was reported as individual shares crashing and not a market trend.
What are they going to say? "Trackers, like these 300 we have on our site, are monitoring all this stuff and our NDA doesn't let us tell you what they are doing."
330M people in the country, you can run that entirely though a remote FBI office.
and the people using the data are gonna be the local cops; FBI ain't flying out to chase a couple of basic-ass assault charges or thefts.
email snooping, hand full of highway cameras at known bottlenecks, border crossings -- these are abstractions to most people. the flock cameras in their neighborhood are not, and cannot be absractions.
Do you remember how a series of crazy coincidences and freak accidents kept preventing the LHC from being turned on? What if the LHC was causing world-ending or life-ending events, and we simply kept surviving only in thinner and thinner slices of amplitude (timelines) where those freak accidents happened, but where also more improbable world conditions took place?
LHC is a pea shooter compared to the absolute ion cannons that are cosmic rays hitting the upper atmosphere, which are pea shooters compared to acretion disk collisions or particle collisions about a magnetar. Sorry to ruin the fun! :^)
The center of mass of these natural collisions is a huge Lorentz transformation away from Earth's center of mass, which could explain why some unwanted effects are harmless to us. To put a paranoid person at ease you'd need to go a bit further. It's all covered in detail here: https://cds.cern.ch/record/1111112?ln=en
> WTF!! When did we land in the middle of a Black Mirror episode?
At least a decade ago! The first TVs with Automatic Content Recognition shipped in 2013[0]. There was also a brief panic in 2024 about air fryers spying on people[1].
And of course practically every website you visit is doing a full session recording with mouse movements and key presses captured.
Ah the good old days when "we kill people based on metadata"[0] was the conversation and we thought it wouldn't get more invasive. Now we just straight up extract data
...and that was before 2014... over 12 years ago... now people paste into chatbot every content and any content then scan their faces, fingerprints, and documents as a routine.
I’ll keep repeating this but I used to be a technical project manager for “advance analytics” for a major media agency and we used this data in our reporting for ad reach effectiveness.
I worked at a major media buyer agency “big 5” in advanced analytics; we were a team of 5-10 data scientists. We got a firehose on behalf of our client, a major movie studio, of search of their titles by zip code from “G”.
On top of that we had clean roomed audience data from “F” of viewers of the ads/trailers who also viewed ads on their set top boxes. Basically any internet connected device you get is probably doing whatever it can to sniff mac addresses of your network at the least.
From a previous comment of mine:
> … my Insignia TV (best buy store brand) with fire tv built in is basically unusable. Echoing a previous comment I made too, about “smart tvs” and the “streaming sticks”: Hey, have you ever thought of why even the $149 Black Friday loss-leader no-name-brand TVs all have Amazon Fire, Roku, or are now "Smart" in some way? Certainly isn't because they need to incentivise you to connect it to the internet so it acts as a Nielsen-esq measurement device of all media you view on the screen via digital fingerprints that exist in all commercial media and advertisements. [1][2]
I despise the ones that then, after you decline, tell you the app doesn’t work without Bluetooth enabled although the functionality does not need Bluetooth for anything
> And of course practically every website you visit is doing a full session recording with mouse movements and key presses captured.
Well yeah at the very least, that’s Google Analytics and/or similar alternatives.
Most individual websites outside of Google/Facebook/Amazon don’t get any data other than what you do on their website, so it doesn’t seem quite as creepy to me as a device on your home network port scanning and sniffing other traffic.
Google and Facebook can and do ‘spy’ a lot, of course, but otherwise the browser does protect you from most trivial spying by random sites. Not that that’s reason to feel any safer; the few people actually spying on what you do everywhere on the web are the ones with the most resources. This is all going to get way weirder with AI logs, I’m guessing.
You can check this claim for yourself by opening NetworkTools in your browser, then moving your mouse and pressing a few keys to see what data is sent to the server.
Before that. Around 2005: DVD players that require updating cryptography keys and hence want an internet connection (and consequently can send around data).
And the first store clerks at the time that shout that "all people have agreed on that, period, complaints are non appropriate because society decided".
A small step for senseless humanity, a giant leap for the beast with big promises (that we are still seeing in development).
Seriously? Literally every appliance that demands an internet connection and use of an app does this. That's why the cheapest products on the market are designed to need apps and connectivity, the prices are subsidized by the assumption of ad data to sell. Been like this for years.
We were living in a "simulated" reality, where tech corporations produced amazing things a ran services practically for free asking very little in return, because it was all being funded by "stimulus" money - effectively the country getting into debt and creating money out of thin air. Once we reached the limit of this we had to face the reality of these companies actually having to pay their own way.
> I'm half convinced the first run of the LHC split the timeline and we've landed in the evil one.
Sadly the real answer is much less dramatic: we did this entirely to ourselves, voluntarily, purely out of lazily taking the path of least resistance offered us by companies that don't have our best interests in mind.
Well it's completely voluntary since no sane person would ever need a "smart" coffee machine connected to the internet. So IMHO it's more Idiocracy than Black Mirror
It doesn't sound plausible to me that the main buyers of this information would be advertisers. It sounds more likely that the buyers are black-hat hackers, or intelligence agencies. The main reason someone would want a map of all of the devices behind your home router is so they know what to target first for exploitation, if they want access.
There are companies that sell people's home ip address as a VPN/Proxy for anyone who wants to use it for anything. They call it "residential ip's". People use them for web scraping, but probably tons of illegal stuff too. AI companies use them to not get blocked.
I've heard that they put it in IoT devices, free Android apps that people use on their TVs, free phone apps, games, prob lots more.. The companies advertise it like its super safe only legit normal people borrow the internet from these people but then in fine print it'll say its not our responsibility etc.
What I have been wondering is - since they don't seem to care or check what people are using the "residential ip's" for, what happens when someone does a bunch of illegal stuff on some random person's home IP and ends up raided by cops?
I feel like the world is going in these directions.. the excuse is always "well, they clicked Yes on the Terms of Service! They agreed to it!"
That’s where they want to be. Your laptop isn’t interesting. You own two thermostats, an EV charger, two Samsung TVs, an LG, etc etc. The LG is watching Netflix. That’s the good stuff.
>You own two thermostats, an EV charger, two Samsung TVs, an LG, etc etc. The LG is watching Netflix. That’s the good stuff.
That still doesn't make any sense. If they want to collaborate to build an advertising profile, your public IP is all you need. Otherwise if they're not collaborating, what's the plan, find 0days in random IOT devices and hack them? I might be concerned about random chinese IOT devices doing that, but not devices from western companies.
They don't want to collaborate, they want to sell.
Data brokers are buying from multiple sources because maybe a home has a keurig but not an LG tv. Or an LG tv and not a keurig.
The plan for the likes of Keurig is "These data brokers will give us free money for data from our coffee machines? Where can we sign up!". It doesn't even matter if the money translates to $0.01 per unit sold. That's probably the most disgusting part.
>Data brokers are buying from multiple sources because maybe a home has a keurig but not an LG tv. Or an LG tv and not a keurig.
Right, but OP's premise is that putting everything on the same LAN is somehow even better for the manufacturers/data brokers/ad networks/whatever, which doesn't make any sense. The only thing that actually matters is a device with internet connection.
I’m not following how the public IP address provides value without collaboration. I can listen to mDNS and gather a ton of info about devices you own. But how would knowing your public IP address inform me about which devices you own?
I recently figured out how to do a vlan and set it so IoT devices can't see each other, just access the Internet (AP isolation). It hasn't broken anything so far (Matter devices excluded).
I think it's high time for legislatures (US, California, EU, whatever) to make this kind of thing outright illegal. No consent popups. No fine print. Just illegal.
Coffee machine scans network? Nope.
Coffee machine reports things about your network? Nope.
TV does ACR? Nope.
TV reports things it incidentally learns about your listening habits? Nope.
TV transmits any microphone data or things derived from mic data that aren't explicit user commands? Nope.
Companies who collect this data even though it's illegal want to sell it or use it for marketing or transfer it to anyone else? Nope.
Company A provides an SDK to company B that does this kind of thing and company B sells the product? A is liable, civilly and criminally, and B is also civilly liable to the extent that they should have and did not exercise due diligence to prevent it.
Company A, company B, and/or the end user have some contract shifting liability? Nope. The parties that the law said are liable are liable, cannot use the contract to avoid liability, cannot use the contract to recover money they have paid as a result of this liability, and cannot enforce arbitration provisions.
Anyone tries to use a contract that is considered illegal under this law? That party becomes responsible for their opposition's legal fees even if they are ultimately found not liable for some other reason.
Police wants to buy this data? Sure, they're welcome to buy what's legally available, except that they, like everyone else, will have a hard time getting the data because it's illegal for anyone to acquire it or sell it.
It's high time to get this done. We've got this and the recent evidence of LG doing all kinds of worse crap and it really should be possible to get some legislators on board.
Stop spreading this idea that all politicians are corrupt. You're killing democracy, and watering down revelations of specific proven cases of corruption.
I understand your feeling of despair. Of course I do. But you don't have to make other people despair. History has shown us where we end up when enough people despair.
My general theory is that the aggregate spent on marketing is largely a function of marketers’ budgets. They’ll spend it in whatever way they think is cost effective, but the amount spent may not vary all that strongly with as the set of available marketing technologies changes.
If marketers cannot pay Google, Meta, etc to show their ads to people whom pervasive surveillance indicates are the appropriate targets, then they will pay companies (probably still Google and Meta and very likely still American companies) to show ads to people selected by other means. Everyone’s retirement account will be just fine.
For that matter, consider who some of the biggest offenders are right now. LG and Samsung are Korean. Sony is Japanese. (But Vizio is American and seems to be owned by Walmart.) Maybe reducing surveillance capitalism will make it harder for some of these foreign companies to extract money from the US.
There’s also the national security aspect. Right now, we expect foreign corporations to extensively spy on us. Sure, a law would not necessarily stop foreign powers from spying on us, but at least if we banned the general practice, then foreign powers who do spy on us might get noticed.
I would be a single-issue voter on this. If anyone running for office is doing this, and can get it done, they are getting my vote. I'm so tired of this kind of thing being normal and accepted. It has eroded the public's trust in pretty much all of corporate America, or has at least had a hand in it.
With all the hacks going on, I can't imagine why any company would even want to collect anything if they have a business model that works without it. I would think selling coffee makers and coffee pods would easily be a business model that works without data harvesting. Companies made whole businesses out of selling coffee makers alone for decades.
Why would a company integrate bullshit SDKs into a coffee maker? Because coffee maker ACR isn’t worth anything and because there are companies that will pay absolutely freaking crazy amounts of money, possibly in excess of the entire sale price of the machine.
How do I exhaustively check for whether devices in my household are doing this? Is it enough that I don't see them on my desktop's list of available networks?
I tend to face the problem of too many choices with products. I'm actually thankful that manufacturers like Keurig are voluntarily taking themselves out of the pool of consideration. It makes my decisions easier. I can only see things getting even easier as time goes on.
I can understand a buggy device flooding the network. What's harder to justify is why a coffee maker needs to know anything about the other devices in your house in the first place
> It does so because, as Keurig notes, it’s collecting data about your household in order to let Keurig sell it to advertisers.
This is either outright false or at least highly misleading. Keurig says they may sell information about your coffee brewing habits to third parties (i.e. your usage of the coffee machine itself), but nowhere does "Keurig note" that they collect other data about your household through network scans and sell that to advertisers.
I'm not even sure which tweet you were referring to that implied that. In any case, there are tons of responses here that are interpreting your quote as saying Keurig admitted they do network scans to acquire info about your household to sell to third parties, and that (the idea that Keurig says they do this) is flat out false.
> It does so because, as Keurig notes, it’s collecting data about your household in order to let Keurig sell it to advertisers.
Off topic, but an odd and dubious upside to AI is that it provides an actually valid reason for this mass data collection. Before AI, as you note it was for advertisers, but what are they actually doing with it?
The promise was that with all this data, advertising would be perfected. I seem to remember fears back in the day that it could end up being a form of mind control, with this perfect understanding of you an advertiser could sell you anything, and you'd willingly consume adverts as entertainment they'd be so perfectly tailored to you. Not something any of us would want I'm sure, but that was the promise for advertisers.
The opposite ended up happening. Nobody wants to use the internet without an ad-blocker, when you're forced to use Youtube or something without an ad-blocker you're counting down the seconds until you can skip it, and the rest of the time you don't even notice they're there, let alone any kind of mind control.
Of course you do get thinly veiled advertisements as entertainment, but none of them use mass data collection, they're really not much different to how tv shows used to get made to sell toys in the 80s.
The reason I bring this up is for the question; what is this mass data collection for? We (really) don't want it, advertisers are either unwilling or unable to use it and it costs a tonne of money and effort.
The obvious, and disappointing, reason is that we all need to pretend it works or the internet as we know it collapses, for better or worse. That plus AI being the new excuse I suppose.
How are they defining "metadata"? 1TB of text in 10 days is........A LOT. Metadata about what exactly? What time you brew your coffee every morning, how many cups you drink per day, whether you like regular coffee or cappuccino? I'm having a hard time understanding how all that can add up to 1TB of data. If it's recording audio or packet sniffing, it becomes a lot easier to understand.
In parallel to the story itself, for f.. sake, the website that hosts the story uses 1700+ tracking partners to operate and pushes for cookie consent. We should ban links to such sites equally strong as IoT devices in subject as my personal opinion
I’m wondering the same thing. Then I started wondering whether gp meant Muse the band, because from what I can figure Meta’s Muse won’t make any difference in this, but there’s a slim chance a Muse song with lyrics that can change a software developer’s soul.
This is just me musing. I don’t actually know what Muse’s music is like.
I'm sceptical only because this is a screen shot of unifi client info, and unifi seems to have some bug that will report devices as using terabytes of data in the last 24 hours, which is obviously not true..
Here's an example from my unifi dash right now, my laptop has done 24tb of data? lol email and web browsing
Mine is doing the exact opposite - clients show almost zero activity even when I'm running speedtest, and my main PC shows only 1 GB data used in last 24h when it should be ~26 GB according to OS.
I'm not the most versed with networking or operating systems but I wonder how difficult it would be to program a raspberry pi to poison the datasets of these types of things.
Program it to impersonate a wide set of devices and randomly respond as such in a home. Or even if it would be worth it.
Maybe if a phone app could do it too that would make it easy to poison the dataset only when you purchase new smart devices while they do their heavier reconnaissance during the first few weeks (assuming Keurig and the like calm down a bit after some period of time).
The only financial impact to them would be your single ad profile. They don't care about having the widest and most accurate knowledge of all devices on their customers' networks to sell as some dataset, they want to target ads at you based on which products you have - and maybe get a bigger payout if it finds something on your network that it advertised to you a whole ago, as that confirmed conversion is worth a ton to advertisers.
If I had a machine like this on my network, I'd be tempted to figure out where it's sending the telemetry data, and help it out by sending a LOT more. It would be funny if they blocked my IP because I was reporting too much data.
Yes, they can trivially build systems to filter this out, but your favorite coding agent can probably make it more stochastic / clever ;)
In my experience, this has basically 'neutered' personalised advertising for me (I get all kinds of ads, in all kinds of languages, when using my Google account or network w/o an adblocker); so it definitely has an effect.
Haha, never looked at it that way, you could indeed read it as "This website puts a value on your privacy" (And subsequently we can't ignore the enormous value, so we're selling it, indeed)
Maybe they want to save their extraction & profile curves per recipe in the cloud or something. Or for less advanced devices, simply notifications to change the filter I guess.
I mean, if you really want profile curves and so on, it could just save it to some sort of SD card, or if you want to be really fancy sync it via bluetooth to a mobile phone with an app. Same with the notifications to change the filter or whatever, or a damn light on the machine. Right?
I have a very old school manual espresso machine (a La Pavoni). It's connected to a "smart" plug, which lets me turn on the machine remotely, and have it turn on automatically in the morning. It's nice to have it heated up and ready to go when I wake up. Nothing about the machine is smart though.
I have an admittedly very specific set of constraints that led to me buying a wifi kettle. I:
- have a short window to get to the train in the morning
- want coffee on the train
- don't particularly like drip machine coffee
- want the water boiling when I wake up so that I can make coffee and get out of the house as quickly as possible
- am more morally opposed to waking up five minutes earlier (pushing my wake time into the 4 o'clock hour) than I am to having a smart device.
I couldn't find a kettle that runs on a timer, and just taping the switch in the "on" position and hooking it up to a plug timer felt unsafe, so getting a stupid wifi kettle and using their stupid app to set it to auto-start was the best option. It's on its own network, though.
so you brush when you wake up right? The brushing takes about five minutes. The kettle probably takes less time than that. Probably two minutes in my experience. Why not just wake up fill up water click it on and then brush. I mean, you could even keep the water filled up the previous night.
I don’t disagree that over-automation is a thing. I miss my more leisurely mornings!
I use a Hario Switch to make coffee. It takes 3:30 to brew, so I pour the water and then brush my teeth and prep while waiting. Async coffee! I’m out the door as soon as the coffee is in the mug and get to the train station about 2 minutes before the train arrives.
I have a smart plug that can turn on and off...I have my coffee maker switched on, and it only switches on when my wifi plug is on. So I can have the water heating before I come down stairs. Whether it's better than a smart coffee maker or not I'm not sure - but at least I have a popular device that has more eye. Not sure how many people are looking at niche coffee makers.
My understanding, and I would love for someone to explain why, is that they measure current with a shunt resistor which is fine for inductive loads like a water heater, but not fine for a big motor for example.
These aren't constraints. These are preferences. Framing them like constraints makes it sound like the whole situation is out of your hands, and therefore owning a smart device is practically thrust upon you by external forces.
Just say it: you bought a smart kettle due to your completely adjustable preferences.
We are constrained by the decisions we have made based on the preferences that we maintain.
Thus-constrained, this person states that they're able to get 5 more minutes of sleep every night and still make coffee before taking the train to work. That's ~25 minutes per week, or ~1.8 hours per month.
They didn't have to choose to go to bed earlier in order to gain this time and still make coffee in the morning. They were going to make coffee with a kettle anyway and were constrained by a the necessity of maintainining ownership of a kettle with which to do that.
So they simply selected a kettle that can be safely automated so as to be ready at the right time every morning instead of one that cannot be. In exchange, they gain around 20 hours per year, for every year that this kettle lasts for. (What would you do for nearly an entire extra day, per year?)
Sure: It's adjustable, just as many constraints are.
Maybe there's even a coffee shop around the corner that they could work at instead, and they could just walk there and brew themselves a cup of coffee using the hot tap on the espresso machine before they start their shift -- and skip the train.
But maybe that wouldn't fit into the constraint of being able to support the dwelling that they prefer to live in.
So maybe they could soften that constraint as well, and live a little lower. (Maybe they can soften enough constraints that they can just live under a bridge somewhere, with no permanent dwelling, no job, and no coffee. Perhaps, if we look hard enough, we might find that even the constraint of living a life -- at all -- is also adjustable.)
GP might realize sooner or later that they need larger security margins, for when unexpected things happen; like really having to go to the toilets, spilling the coffee they just made, etc.
They can shift their daily schedule e.g. 30 minutes earlier and peacefully drink their coffee at home. They also should eat something at home or on their way, because hurrying in a cold morning with an empty stomach is not good. Source: personal experience. I did that for months as a student until I passed out one day in class.
If they don't like waiting for the train in the cold, they probably can find a warm place near the station, and wait there a little.
Yes, having coffee on the train is a preference, which is why I used the word "want". I suppose that having this job, or any job, is technically a preference. I decided to buy a smart kettle to satisfy my preferences given the constraints they impose. The parent asked why someone would buy a smart coffee device, and I thought it would be fun to give my answer for why, despite my general skepticism of smart devices, I bought one.
Boiling water in a kettle takes like 1 minute, in any cases less than two minutes. And other things can be done during this time. There's no real timing constraints that requires a wifi enabled kettle. You may prefer it this way, and that may be what matters the most here, but it's not really a constraint.
These sorts of products aren't typically driven by consumer wants. Rather they're typically driven by B2B/sales/marketing/investor types, who are primarily focused on finding/addressing secondary markets for further profits, more so than it is about addressing core consumer wants.
In other words, these product decisions aren't really made on the rationale that internet connected coffee makers make sense from the standpoint of a consumer who simply wants coffee made...
It's more: "let's make smart coffee makers so that we can sell to 2 markets:
1) a coffee maker to consumers who want coffee made
2) consumers data/eyeballs to advertisers who want their info/eyes
So, separate VLANs, wifi isolation and complete internet blocking for all devices such as this, and only purchase devices that can be controlled via Home Assistant.
Can they? It seems that surveillance data will be able to subsidize coffee machines and make it so you get a better machine for the same price, or an equivalent, cheaper one.
Exactly. I have bunch of appliances that are wifi enabled but they work just fine without it. The stories like these and of firmware updates bricking the appliances is enough to never really look at the benefits of connecting.
Sometimes I like the idea of preheating oven on my way home but then I get home and forget about it.
Something tells me it's not just coffee machines that do this, it's lots of appliances that have useful online capabilities.
My LG washer/dryer tell me when loads are done and when someone lets wet clothes sit in the washer. This is priceless. But yeah they are probably profiling my house.
None, without people like us in their families who are able and willing to help.
We as computer people need to internalize and accept the idea that helping our immediate and even extended family with technology is now part of defending human freedom. And we need to form ourselves into the best helpers we can be by learning how to teach and communicate well.
> None, without people like us in their families who are able and willing to help.
I am able and willing to help my parents get off of a lot of the spyware bullshit they have throughout their house, but they don't want to hear it. They liked the connected stuff and I think that they think I'm a little weird when I push back about why we can't trust corporations like Google or Microsoft to do everything.
Getting better at communicating is unfortunately really hard. And it must pair with the helper aspect: you've got to also provide value.
"Nomad," the guy from the article, was already administering his parents' home LAN.
How do you get there? "Mom and Dad, we're going to set up your home network so that it's blended with my home network. To all the machines in your house and mine, it'll look like they're on the same network together. That'll make it easier for me to help you with any tech problems you're having, on your computer or on any smart device. The connection between our houses will be encrypted and secure" You're installing a router/firewall for them and adding to your WireGuard overlay network, but you're not using any of those words to tell them what's going on.
What to do next? "How was watching TV last night from {$TIMESTAMP_A} to {$TIMESTAMP_B}? Yeah, my network sentinel detected that your TV was sending your viewing habits out to somewhere on the Internet and warned me and blocked it. I can't tell what you were watching, but {$TV_BRAND} sure can." You're monitoring their LAN via the router/firewall you've set up, but you are again not using technical language.
Wherever spying is invisible and frictionless, make it loud and incessant. And continue to provide value to the family on the shared overlay network. Photo and home video backups, media server (it's like Netflix!), mutual offsite buddy backups, password management, a local Minecraft server for the kids and the cousins.
Cultivate a family network garden that is good enough to consider leaving the leviathans behind and build walls around it that are high enough to commit to leaving the leviathans behind for what is now a garden inside a family network castle.
"They like their connected stuff" means their barrier isn't "I don't want a corporation processing my data", it's "I want to be in charge of my interactions with it". That changes what sort of recommendations you can bring to them. An all-or-nothing mindset is rarely the correct way to change someone's mind.
Recommending they turn off ACR and other spyware on their TV is based on recent reporting is good and backed up by said reporting. Probably even recommending against too-good-to-be-true connected doorbells even.
Meanwhile, telling them not to use a first-party Google, Amazon, or Apple smart home speakers is a bit questionable when there's been pretty good audits over the years that show they really do only do wake word detection. You'll just sound like a crazy person if you can't point to some reporting on a device doing bad.
Yeah, I have some relatives that wanted me to turn off the ad blocking because it meant they couldn't watch ads on their mobile games in order to earn more lives / game time.
I like my connected stuff, too, and I'm not a normie.
I don't need voice-activated lights for the basement for when I head down there with my arms full of laundry, or with a bunch of food to put into the freezer, or whatever shit I'm carrying. I don't need them to turn themselves back off after a time, either.
I mean: I could use any of a wide array of motion sensors, but they'll turn the lights on even when I'm just working in the kitchen near the basement stairs. (Or maybe I could use a beam curtain! Yeah! Now they only respond when a beam breaks, instead of when I'm working in the kitchen near the basement stairs!)
Or I could just put the shit down and flip the switch.
Or: Plan ahead, and flip the switch in advance. And then just flip it back off when I'm done down there.
On a long-enough timeline, someone will find a way to make a point of explaining that any combination of a lack of planning and a lack of effort is completely and utterly inexcusable. That every action should should be planned, and that every manual effort has value.
But I chose this path anyway, and I like it this way. I invited the spies into my home very deliberately. The basement light automations work great, by the way, and the default non-voice UI is the same, plain, old-school light switch that the house came with.
(I also chose to carry an always-on pocket supercomputer with me wherever I go even though I have no way to observe what that thing is really doing at any given time.)
I had a single Sonos speaker with Alexa (deactivated) and a Nest carbon monoxide detector. They have both been replaced with non-smart alternatives. The tipping point was seeing friends install smart heating systems and smart locks. I can't imagine any level of convenience that would make me literally put the keys to my house and ability to be warm in the hands of a 3rd party IoT company.
I find the idea that you'd connect things like these to the Internet absolutely insane. I do think we're past the point where being able to ensure you don't leak data isn't compatible with functioning in the modern world, but trying to limit the things that have Internet access to systems where you have control just seems sensible.
I haven't seen any credible evidence that any of the reputable brands of smart speakers send anything other than what you want to send (e.g. the sentence after you say the watchword) to their servers.
Yes they are constantly listening, but this is just for the watch word (as a cue to start listening/sending) but they lack the on-device ability to convert anything else to text on their own. All they can do on their own is listen out for the watch word.
Certain smart TVs on the other hand, are known to constantly stream audio back to their HQ as they don't have on-board watchword detection.
497 comments
Tech enthusiast:"My entire house is smart! Everything is connected to the cloud, automated, and I can control every appliance from my phone!"
Tech worker / Software engineer:"The only piece of technology in my house is a printer from 2004, and I keep a loaded gun next to it in case it makes a noise I don't recognize."
I hope its just a retry loop and not actually data.
Many don't too, just saying there's not really a consensus across all software engineers.
> Tech worker / Software engineer:"The only piece of technology in my house is a printer from 2004, and I keep a loaded gun next to it in case it makes a noise I don't recognize."
You forgot an additional well-known punchline (source: https://old.reddit.com/r/NonPoliticalTwitter/comments/1e8do2...):
> I wouldn't keep the gun next to the printer; it may be able to use it against you
1. It saturated the local network with 1TB of metadata sniffing scans, not the network uplink to the outside world.
2. It does so because, as Keurig notes, it’s collecting data about your household in order to let Keurig sell it to advertisers.
Legislators are cheap to purchase
Why not? iirc some of the smart TVs have been shown to find open wifi networks on their own and upload data. (I'm not sure about that though. But it's plausible and undoubtedly will be implemented some day).
I could also see some kind of partnership with ISPs to use their "public" WiFi hotspots[1]. This seems more likely since it's (probably) harder to honeypot but requires making regional deals.
[1] https://www.highspeedinternet.com/resources/is-your-router-a...
Why you would give a coffee maker access to your WiFi is the real question,
Besides, did you see how he was dressed?
Since most appliances now contain a general-purpose computer, it would be unfair to say that a device is incapable of hacking or hosting malware, because any device with the given sensors and radios and capabilities can be essentially reprogrammed at any time.
So, if we're looking at smart TVs with cameras and microphones and Wi-Fi and Bluetooth and all the connectors, or if we're simply looking at a an ordinary network device, they all fall under the umbrella of general purpose computer, and there is no way to trust their maker, or some equally capable programmer, not to turn them malevolent in some future update.
I don't view this as an issue of terms of service or of software or of your manufacturer. I view this as an existential and fundamental problem with dropping general purpose computers into your home and behind your DMZ.
Consumer operating systems like Windows and Apple have all kinds of countermeasures against this malicious use. But without the proper introspection and without the proper safeguards, a device that looks special purpose but is in fact general purpose is far more dangerous.
Sensors/access is unavoidable, otherwise the device doesn't actually do anything useful. The point is it sets the scope for what the device is able to affect. When people say "set up a separate IoT VLAN" (that still has Internet access) this is basically what they're addressing - how a device can access other devices they may care about more.
Internet access is the catalyst that's created this whole dumpster fire - I don't care about the proprietary software on my keyboard/mouse/UPS/monitor/GPU/etc to nearly the same extent. I've got some TP-Link plugs that I control local network only. They don't get Internet access, so no updates, telemetry backhaul, etc.
The authority to update/configure/change that software is the crux. With proprietary software, there are no cuddly kittens period. Here we've got a case of a "legitimate" company choosing to be a bona fide attacker to increase their bottom line! The harm was exacerbated by a bug causing it to run amok, but even without the bug they are deliberately violating trust.
But even libre software can fall to security holes as well. Meaning you want to centralize the attack surface as much as possible, for administration's sake of keeping updated. "Internet" of things is basically the direct opposite of this - postulating many illegible fine-grained links between devices on different networks. Whereas really need more like the Home Assistant model, where peripheral devices may communicate over the network, but it's only ever over the local network. Think how ethernet is set up when used in industrial control networks (or at least how it should be set up, hehe).
I don’t actually think that applies to coffee makers spying on people though. People shouldn’t be expected to understand how computer networks or ad tech spying works in the same way that literally any child or idiot should know the difference between a lion cub and a house cat.
How do you feel about thermostats? Are some things worth it? I've had a "smart" one for the past five years, part of a new furnace install, that I've stubbornly refused to connect to my wifi. Of course this means if we forget to turn the heat down while no one's home, there's nothing to be done about it.
That, plus nobody in their right mind would buy American (vs French, Italian, German, Dutch...) when it comes to coffee. (yes, Starbucks is a thing here, but I'd argue people who are into _coffee_ don't go there, people go there for other reasons.)
The device is dead simple. No advanced electronics. Nothing complex that can break. Just a coffee maker fine-tuned to near perfection.
The only flaw it has is the handle for the pot. I've resorted to replacing the plastic handle with a fancy walnut one I made myself. I needed that because we tilt the pot sideways to fill the reservoir with water (because of the placement on the kitchen counter and the cabinets above), and that plastic handle is not designed for sideways stresses.
Like the people who reply to nigerian emails have already been pre-qualified by 1) ignoring the misspellings and 2) replying.
Yeah, sure, the terms of service probably say that they can do that. That's still in "unconscionable" territory. And courts do not like unconscionable contracts. If it's unconscionable, it's invalid (if I understand the law correctly).
Is this why everybody wants to make appliances with wireless?
Customers are gonna get lost in the sauce and skip right past all of that and toss the packaging.
Which raises in my mind the obvious defense, which is that if you try to put four or five of these devices on your network they'll be too busy interfering with each other for them to actually spy on anything.
Let the wiretaps wiretap the wiretaps. Keeps 'em busy, makes 'em feel like they're doing something important.
its LGs glass in LG household, and now Keurigs kitchen
There’s no way Keurig is has the intention of paying the kind of costs required to collect a terabyte of data every two weeks for millions of people who own their coffee makers.
There must be some kind of bug here. I imagine if you unplugged it and plugged it in again the data usage would settle down.
Now I'm left wondering what this traffic actually is - assuming probe (arp/icmp) packet size of 64 byte, that's 17kpps. I don't think an ESP32 class Internet-of-Trash chip can even do that. Even bulk transfers rather than small probes would be pushing it.
Perhaps this thing found some fellow-traveler device streaming video on a port it happened to connected to?
... the linked xit says it "broadcast 1TB of data". So maybe some protocol with a much larger packet than icmp, spammed in a hard loop without any delay?
But still must be a bug.
What kind of processor does this thing have ?
Still seems buggy.
Manager: We might miss something. Since scanning doesn't cost us anything, better do it a thousand times a second!
Real world example: þe Windows registry DWORD time periods seems to invite 10^-3s granularity for totally inappropriate timescales. Perhaps its considered a "best practice" by the dick heads that decide to do these things, who knows? Why bother considering how a sysadmin might actually want to use the knobs and dials and what is an appropriate value for a parameter.
I could probably find a better example but this is recent: Smoothwall has an agent (IDEX) that you install on a Windows domain controller and one of its functions can be to harvest DHCP data and pass it onto the firewall so that it can track sessions. The upload period is a registry DWORD value.
I fixed a "problem" by stopping IDEX trying to upload data a thousand times per second. I will also point out that switching on this functionality and the periodicity setting is only applied by editing the registry - there is no GUI for this. The dReal world example -ocs are clear that you should initially set 1000 as the period.
For me that sort of thing comes under the heading of "you are holding it wrong", potential victim shaming and rubbish engineering.
This works only up to a point. Now it is costing them something.
The traffic volume just sounds like a bug to me.
Closed source software/hardware is a data exfiltration device first, and the thing they're sold for secondarily.
TVs, Blurays, set top boxes, MS Windows.. All of them are the same.
Selling devices to consumers is a solved problem. The problem we're currently trying optimise solutions for is selling consumers to the advertising companies.
Even the act of engineering rate limiting costs you more than just having this run wild over your customers networks because the vast majority of people buying these machines do not have the inclination or skills to detect this activity.
With this particular company, everything else they do is malicious so I won't ever give them the benefit of the doubt.
I tried to use a reusable pod in one of their machines the other day and when I shut it the handle broke off leaving me rather confused. Turns out in the closing head of the machine they stuck in 4 big metal spikes to destroy anything put in there. There is absolutely no reason to do this, none, other than being dicks. Had to get out the epoxy and repair the handle of a friends machine.
So yea, screw them.
The frequency etc. leading to 1TB is probably ignorance, but that doesn't matter as it is consequence of malicious scanning either way.
I understand why a TV would keep track of what I’m watching so they can sell the data. I think it should be illegal. It’s horrible. My TV isn’t connected. But the reason they would do it fits in my brain. I can see how they got there.
How a coffee machine got to running network probes… nothing. It seems like some sort of Internet of Things DEFCON presentation topic made up by putting random words together.
So to think that on top of that they were purposefully causing so much traffic on the local network is just a few steps too far for me to think that part was intentional.
They're explicitly taking advantage of their customers' trust, and deserve to go bankrupt.
Yes, it's malicious and completely unnecessary, but incompetence has potentially made it a PR problem.
This may be working exactly as designed, as it costs them effectively nothing to constantly scan.
We had a similar thing, the other team wouldn't back down.
We ended up implementing a kind of rate limiting internally.
If the previous request (from that IP) was more than 4.5 seconds ago we let the check request through as normal.
If the previous request (from that IP) was more recent than that we just returned a cached "there is no update" payload that had a TTL of 60 seconds.
We told them this and left it up to them, they soon changed their polling frequency.
It might not seem to be anything (people will assume private network traffic is free) but there is a cost - it's capacity that could be used for other purposes, eg. home alarms.
Here that means no lawyers, no discovery, $100 to file in plain language, and a company employee (not a company lawyer, or a contractor, or a temp employee) must attend or they default.
$15k damages.
Reasons it could happen? Imagine grandpa has a tech come out 4 times, because his network is super slow. EG, this thing pounding his wifi for its scans.
Grandpa gets reimbursed for the four techs who came out, that's it.
Grandpa gets his money back. The company? Well, it has to spend money talking to a lawyer, because even though a lawyer can't attend small-claims court, they still consult.
They also have to send an employee to small-claims court, just have to deal with it. In the end it costs the company thousands of dollars maybe even over ten grand. It costs you a hundred bucks and you get your money back. That sort of asymmetry is beautiful, and if everybody availed themselves in small claims court, it would be far better than any class action lawsuit.
Grandpa is definitely not getting $15k in damages, and Keurig can deal with this with their in house lawyer that they're already paying a salary for. They're definitely not shelling out big bucks here. It'd be cheaper for them to let the default judgement happen than to actually show up.
Let everyone file that claim for a single geek squad visit.
Please show me how this is suboptimal? Especially with LLMs to write the demand letter, and walk you through the process.
And 'using their in house lawyer' still has time cost, as does dealing with the routing and pondering the service letter. And accounting paying up. There is no aspect of your 'worst case' where it's bad. It's still all pluses. And if as I suggest, lots and lots of people do it, then they end up with a loss on that product.
If each case is $1000, or even $500 payout, how much profit does that take? Profit on 100 units? 50? If a product is horrifically bad, and everyone runs to small claims court, that's disaster for a company.
> If each case is $1000, or even $500 payout
How many people are going to spend $500 on service techs coming out to their house? So far we've got a report from one guy who figured it out with no damages at all, and therefore no case for a small claims court. Since it was found to be defective 10 days after first use, it's probably still eligible to be returned for a refund, so even the cost of the machine isn't eligible.
> If a product is horrifically bad, and everyone runs to small claims court, that's disaster for a company
This much I can agree with for sure. While it is definitely bad, I don't think flooding small claims courts is going to be a viable strategy in this particular case.
Right now companies are somewhat limited in how much use they can get out their horde of private and personal information, but AI is changing that rapidly. As long as you don't mind a huge rate of error (and companies don't because it all becomes "good enough" at a large enough scale) it's basically perfect for the task of digging through endless amounts of information and spewing out bullet points.
Not in my house. What is even the point of connecting a coffee machine or a washing machine to the internet? I think my washing machine advertised that I could download new washing cycle programs in the app. Who on earth cares?
None of these are worth the spying that these companies do though.
I have all of my IoT devices on separate Wifi network(s) and VLANs and almost all of them are isolated so they can't talk to each other, plus I occasionally look at how much data they are sending/receiving from the Internet (some is expected obviously, and it differs by device).
Doing this requires a considerable amount of admin work and IT knowledge though. It also requires something a step above most consumer grade or supplier provided networking equipment.
I've never spotted anything egregious like the coffee maker in the OP but if I did I'd be making sure other people knew about it and the device itself is either firewalled off properly or replaced by a brand that isn't a security risk.
As someone who has done this, it's a one-time cost (as long as you're not the sort who simply can't stop tinkering with it and ends up totally rebuilding it like once a quarter (don't ask me how I know)) and -if you have even just a shaky understanding of how to do it- it's not _that_ large of a cost.
> ...and IT knowledge though.
I definitely agree that doing this requires quite a bit of IT knowledge... but it's all stuff that's pretty easily learnable for anyone who's interested in technical stuff and/or technically-inclined.
For folks who are looking to do this on their home LAN, I have some hardware manufacturer recommendations:
All of this VLAN work will be entirely pointless if your switches can't be programmed to enforce the separation, so one will need "managed" switches of some kind. I'd recommend anyone who wants to try to do this to have a look at Mikrotik switches... they are inexpensive and definitely more than good enough for a fancy home LAN.
Mikrotik also sells routers and WiFi APs. I can't comment on the quality, as I have slapped together my own router PC and use OpenWRT Ones for my APs... but I've found their switches to be more than good enough for my fancy home LAN. Perhaps their routers and AP are equally good?
Mikrotik publishes pretty comprehensive documentation here [0]. If you want to dick around with the Mikrotik management CLI for RouterOS -which is their name for their fancy management software- you can install the x86 version of RouterOS in a VM by booting a VM from one of the x86 install images at [1]. They also have a much simpler management software that you can run on all of their switches called "SwOS" -documented here [2]- but that doesn't have any x86 installation media so you can't play with it on your PC.
[0] <https://manual.mikrotik.com/docs/introduction>
[1] <https://mikrotik.com/download?architecture=x86>
[2] <https://manual.mikrotik.com/docs/bridging-and-switching/swos...>
Looks like nmap OS detection can use ~90kb per host per attempt.
But why do they need to collect 1 TB? Sounds like a lot of redundant/doublicated entries then for a small network?
Makes me think of DraftKings. You take your average 20 something sports fan - drinking beer, watching the game. And, on the other end of that smartphone display exist some of the most complex algorithms ever designed by teams of mathematics / statistics PhDs and it's deliberately built around targeting... this one guy from Florida who is pretty sure his team will be up by 7 at halftime.
Maybe it's more of a morbid joke, but it makes me laugh to think about.
It's an accurate explanation.
so if you know that a user is having an affair, you might want to serve divorce lawyer ads (I'd imagine those are very expensive) or something.
this kind of data though is just like a cog in the machine, but it can e.g. give enough info to know how many people likely are in that household, and so on. useful when combined with other signals
It can also correlate it with geolocation data. Google, for eg, sniffs all broadcasted SSIDs with their StreetView cars. If you can pick up on a SSID (or any of the MAC addresses of the other devices), you can buy the data set that includes it which further pinpoints demographics given the neighborhood AMI.
You can also build behavioral profiles patterns based on things like, for eg, if a baby monitor model is present or a robot vacuum, if certain devices only connect at certain times, etc.
I think the general rule for adtech is that profile guesstimates just need to be around 70%+ fidelity to determine if a sale can be made.
Lastly, you can also just sell the data on the gray market. The more datapoints, the higher the price. Most consumer product companies do that since we have little-to-no data privacy laws and the people who seem the most aware of it also are generally very apathetic and disinterested in advocating for them.
For example, your aged mother's phone will get pinged within X meters of an urgent-care facility, or she'll do some web-search about "hip pain", and then all the adult children start getting ads about elderly-parent-care.
Or perhaps the pervy-panopticon decides some phone-on-wifi events look like adultery, and both suppposed spouses start getting ads for divorce lawyers, private investigators, or track-covering products. (Bonus if certain specialized "adult" toys are detected on Wifi or Bluetooth...)
it's probably even more dystopian now with phone apps vacuuming up every last dreg.
Scale it up - make that millions of homes. Now there is godlike strategic value. Esp when "borrowed" by 3 letter agencies.
If you have even very crude data from somewhere else for the targeting, improvements in attribution tech are actually the more important factor. The adtech company mostly doesn't even care who you are, just whether the ad turned into a purchase or not, and that's where a lot of the invasive tracking comes from. They'd be perfectly happy with a quickly changing "identity" if they knew it was reliable and stable between ad and purchase.
WTF!! When did we land in the middle of a Black Mirror episode?
I'm half convinced the first run of the LHC split the timeline and we've landed in the evil one.
With just a little bit of interaction with the modern internet, the profiles created are stunningly accurate. Age, gender, political ideology, favorite food, relationship status, how many kids you have.
All this stuff gets slowly collected, aggregated and shared amongst data brokers.
People would care so much more if they knew just how invasive advertising actually is. All to try and convince you to drink one more coke or grab one more cheeseburger.
Maybe I should be port scanning it to make sure?
330M people in the country, you can run that entirely though a remote FBI office.
and the people using the data are gonna be the local cops; FBI ain't flying out to chase a couple of basic-ass assault charges or thefts.
email snooping, hand full of highway cameras at known bottlenecks, border crossings -- these are abstractions to most people. the flock cameras in their neighborhood are not, and cannot be absractions.
If people didn't care then why do so many companies have to coerce/deceive users into using their product?
Convenience my ass - the alternative to "convenience" is not participating in modern society, which isn't a decision at all.
Ahem
https://www.gov.uk/data-protection
This depends on the country:
- In Germany, many people are very suspicious about such privacy invasions.
- In Singapore, on the other hand, people seem to very accepting of public surveillance if it serves public safety.
- In China, of course, public surveillance is also huge (at least in the big cities). I don't know how Chinese citizens think about that.
And thanks to surveillance, you never will.
World only survives, in realities where this particular creature in containment is alive. I’ll see if I can dig it up.
> Reactive Action: None taken; event fully consistent with long-term probability models.
heh. love scp humor.
But thanks for an hour-long break from work nevertheless.
SCP Wiki should itself be classified an Euclid-level threat (TV Tropes is obviously Keter class).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_suicide_and_immortalit...
https://reactormag.com/divided-by-infinity/
People can work around patents, or pay for licensing them etc, if they really want to do something.
At least a decade ago! The first TVs with Automatic Content Recognition shipped in 2013[0]. There was also a brief panic in 2024 about air fryers spying on people[1].
And of course practically every website you visit is doing a full session recording with mouse movements and key presses captured.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_content_recognition
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/nov/05/air-fryer...
[0] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tL8_caB35Pg
I worked at a major media buyer agency “big 5” in advanced analytics; we were a team of 5-10 data scientists. We got a firehose on behalf of our client, a major movie studio, of search of their titles by zip code from “G”.
On top of that we had clean roomed audience data from “F” of viewers of the ads/trailers who also viewed ads on their set top boxes. Basically any internet connected device you get is probably doing whatever it can to sniff mac addresses of your network at the least.
From a previous comment of mine:
> … my Insignia TV (best buy store brand) with fire tv built in is basically unusable. Echoing a previous comment I made too, about “smart tvs” and the “streaming sticks”: Hey, have you ever thought of why even the $149 Black Friday loss-leader no-name-brand TVs all have Amazon Fire, Roku, or are now "Smart" in some way? Certainly isn't because they need to incentivise you to connect it to the internet so it acts as a Nielsen-esq measurement device of all media you view on the screen via digital fingerprints that exist in all commercial media and advertisements. [1][2]
[1] https://www.ispot.tv/
[2] https://www.samba.tv/
Doesn't Google basically make this kind of data public? I know I've seen maps by state of what people are searching for, this is barely different.
Point being, it seems absurd to compare this to snooping on people's private networks by third parties
Well yeah at the very least, that’s Google Analytics and/or similar alternatives.
Most individual websites outside of Google/Facebook/Amazon don’t get any data other than what you do on their website, so it doesn’t seem quite as creepy to me as a device on your home network port scanning and sniffing other traffic.
Google and Facebook can and do ‘spy’ a lot, of course, but otherwise the browser does protect you from most trivial spying by random sites. Not that that’s reason to feel any safer; the few people actually spying on what you do everywhere on the web are the ones with the most resources. This is all going to get way weirder with AI logs, I’m guessing.
And the first store clerks at the time that shout that "all people have agreed on that, period, complaints are non appropriate because society decided".
A small step for senseless humanity, a giant leap for the beast with big promises (that we are still seeing in development).
April 29, 2016. It explains so much.
Lovey example: https://frescocooks.com/platform/marketing-and-engagement
Air Fryers selling data: https://abc7news.com/post/certain-air-fryers-app-connected-a...
Student in NZ protesting it: https://www.consumer.org.nz/consumer-rights-and-campaigns/da...
Hope your TV isn't connected to the internet: https://www.cnet.com/tech/home-entertainment/tv-spying-yes-h...
The first thing that Meta did after Brexit was moving its UK's user data to the US.
The FUD (never laughter) came from the scummy US ad-tech industry; the people whos very salleries depend on invading our privacy.
You will find many of them posting (and downvoting GDPR posts) here on HN to spread their FUD.
Sadly the real answer is much less dramatic: we did this entirely to ourselves, voluntarily, purely out of lazily taking the path of least resistance offered us by companies that don't have our best interests in mind.
I'd convergence was about 10 years back. Whenever the David Cameron pig story broke.
The majority of people just chose to turn their blind eye towards those developments and dismiss the warnings as conspiracy theories.
"Smart" devices have been pulling this shit for years. If you're surprised by this you weren't paying attention!
I've heard that they put it in IoT devices, free Android apps that people use on their TVs, free phone apps, games, prob lots more.. The companies advertise it like its super safe only legit normal people borrow the internet from these people but then in fine print it'll say its not our responsibility etc.
What I have been wondering is - since they don't seem to care or check what people are using the "residential ip's" for, what happens when someone does a bunch of illegal stuff on some random person's home IP and ends up raided by cops?
I feel like the world is going in these directions.. the excuse is always "well, they clicked Yes on the Terms of Service! They agreed to it!"
This shit needs to be banned, now!
That still doesn't make any sense. If they want to collaborate to build an advertising profile, your public IP is all you need. Otherwise if they're not collaborating, what's the plan, find 0days in random IOT devices and hack them? I might be concerned about random chinese IOT devices doing that, but not devices from western companies.
Data brokers are buying from multiple sources because maybe a home has a keurig but not an LG tv. Or an LG tv and not a keurig.
The plan for the likes of Keurig is "These data brokers will give us free money for data from our coffee machines? Where can we sign up!". It doesn't even matter if the money translates to $0.01 per unit sold. That's probably the most disgusting part.
Right, but OP's premise is that putting everything on the same LAN is somehow even better for the manufacturers/data brokers/ad networks/whatever, which doesn't make any sense. The only thing that actually matters is a device with internet connection.
Client isolation would help, but it also breaks some devices.
Are there decent daemons that allow me to allowlist which broadcast traffic to permit?
Ideally it'd be compatible with IPv6-only clients on my LAN.
I feel like we could build a custom reflector/firewall that would make selective isolation possible.
Because the article is also full of 238 advertisers.
Coffee machine scans network? Nope.
Coffee machine reports things about your network? Nope.
TV does ACR? Nope.
TV reports things it incidentally learns about your listening habits? Nope.
TV transmits any microphone data or things derived from mic data that aren't explicit user commands? Nope.
Companies who collect this data even though it's illegal want to sell it or use it for marketing or transfer it to anyone else? Nope.
Company A provides an SDK to company B that does this kind of thing and company B sells the product? A is liable, civilly and criminally, and B is also civilly liable to the extent that they should have and did not exercise due diligence to prevent it.
Company A, company B, and/or the end user have some contract shifting liability? Nope. The parties that the law said are liable are liable, cannot use the contract to avoid liability, cannot use the contract to recover money they have paid as a result of this liability, and cannot enforce arbitration provisions.
Anyone tries to use a contract that is considered illegal under this law? That party becomes responsible for their opposition's legal fees even if they are ultimately found not liable for some other reason.
Police wants to buy this data? Sure, they're welcome to buy what's legally available, except that they, like everyone else, will have a hard time getting the data because it's illegal for anyone to acquire it or sell it.
It's high time to get this done. We've got this and the recent evidence of LG doing all kinds of worse crap and it really should be possible to get some legislators on board.
I understand your feeling of despair. Of course I do. But you don't have to make other people despair. History has shown us where we end up when enough people despair.
If marketers cannot pay Google, Meta, etc to show their ads to people whom pervasive surveillance indicates are the appropriate targets, then they will pay companies (probably still Google and Meta and very likely still American companies) to show ads to people selected by other means. Everyone’s retirement account will be just fine.
For that matter, consider who some of the biggest offenders are right now. LG and Samsung are Korean. Sony is Japanese. (But Vizio is American and seems to be owned by Walmart.) Maybe reducing surveillance capitalism will make it harder for some of these foreign companies to extract money from the US.
There’s also the national security aspect. Right now, we expect foreign corporations to extensively spy on us. Sure, a law would not necessarily stop foreign powers from spying on us, but at least if we banned the general practice, then foreign powers who do spy on us might get noticed.
With all the hacks going on, I can't imagine why any company would even want to collect anything if they have a business model that works without it. I would think selling coffee makers and coffee pods would easily be a business model that works without data harvesting. Companies made whole businesses out of selling coffee makers alone for decades.
https://help.earnapp.com/hc/en-us/articles/38191916327441--W...
I think Bright Data is similar but I didn’t find their authoritative numbers. It doesn’t help that my ad blocker blocks their entire domain.
The people that said LG isn’t the only company doing invasive data harvesting is sadly correct.
How did we as a society let it get to this point?
This is either outright false or at least highly misleading. Keurig says they may sell information about your coffee brewing habits to third parties (i.e. your usage of the coffee machine itself), but nowhere does "Keurig note" that they collect other data about your household through network scans and sell that to advertisers.
I'm not even sure which tweet you were referring to that implied that. In any case, there are tons of responses here that are interpreting your quote as saying Keurig admitted they do network scans to acquire info about your household to sell to third parties, and that (the idea that Keurig says they do this) is flat out false.
Off topic, but an odd and dubious upside to AI is that it provides an actually valid reason for this mass data collection. Before AI, as you note it was for advertisers, but what are they actually doing with it?
The promise was that with all this data, advertising would be perfected. I seem to remember fears back in the day that it could end up being a form of mind control, with this perfect understanding of you an advertiser could sell you anything, and you'd willingly consume adverts as entertainment they'd be so perfectly tailored to you. Not something any of us would want I'm sure, but that was the promise for advertisers. The opposite ended up happening. Nobody wants to use the internet without an ad-blocker, when you're forced to use Youtube or something without an ad-blocker you're counting down the seconds until you can skip it, and the rest of the time you don't even notice they're there, let alone any kind of mind control. Of course you do get thinly veiled advertisements as entertainment, but none of them use mass data collection, they're really not much different to how tv shows used to get made to sell toys in the 80s.
The reason I bring this up is for the question; what is this mass data collection for? We (really) don't want it, advertisers are either unwilling or unable to use it and it costs a tonne of money and effort. The obvious, and disappointing, reason is that we all need to pretend it works or the internet as we know it collapses, for better or worse. That plus AI being the new excuse I suppose.
Good lord.
But I sincerely hope things like muse will force public and unethical programmers to change.
This is just me musing. I don’t actually know what Muse’s music is like.
Here's an example from my unifi dash right now, my laptop has done 24tb of data? lol email and web browsing
https://imgur.com/a/I54vcYR
Yes, they can trivially build systems to filter this out, but your favorite coding agent can probably make it more stochastic / clever ;)
In my experience, this has basically 'neutered' personalised advertising for me (I get all kinds of ads, in all kinds of languages, when using my Google account or network w/o an adblocker); so it definitely has an effect.
What we need is to ban this sort of thing outright.
What kind of functions it has that can't be replaced by:
- walking a few meters and pushing a physical button
- waiting a whopping minute for coffee to brew, instead of triggering it remotely
- have a short window to get to the train in the morning - want coffee on the train - don't particularly like drip machine coffee - want the water boiling when I wake up so that I can make coffee and get out of the house as quickly as possible - am more morally opposed to waking up five minutes earlier (pushing my wake time into the 4 o'clock hour) than I am to having a smart device.
I couldn't find a kettle that runs on a timer, and just taping the switch in the "on" position and hooking it up to a plug timer felt unsafe, so getting a stupid wifi kettle and using their stupid app to set it to auto-start was the best option. It's on its own network, though.
I do feel that over-automation is a thing
I use a Hario Switch to make coffee. It takes 3:30 to brew, so I pour the water and then brush my teeth and prep while waiting. Async coffee! I’m out the door as soon as the coffee is in the mug and get to the train station about 2 minutes before the train arrives.
This is possibly not an issue with a regular drip coffee machine. It’s definitely an issue with a kettle or, say, air fryer.
Just say it: you bought a smart kettle due to your completely adjustable preferences.
Thus-constrained, this person states that they're able to get 5 more minutes of sleep every night and still make coffee before taking the train to work. That's ~25 minutes per week, or ~1.8 hours per month.
They didn't have to choose to go to bed earlier in order to gain this time and still make coffee in the morning. They were going to make coffee with a kettle anyway and were constrained by a the necessity of maintainining ownership of a kettle with which to do that.
So they simply selected a kettle that can be safely automated so as to be ready at the right time every morning instead of one that cannot be. In exchange, they gain around 20 hours per year, for every year that this kettle lasts for. (What would you do for nearly an entire extra day, per year?)
Sure: It's adjustable, just as many constraints are.
Maybe there's even a coffee shop around the corner that they could work at instead, and they could just walk there and brew themselves a cup of coffee using the hot tap on the espresso machine before they start their shift -- and skip the train.
But maybe that wouldn't fit into the constraint of being able to support the dwelling that they prefer to live in.
So maybe they could soften that constraint as well, and live a little lower. (Maybe they can soften enough constraints that they can just live under a bridge somewhere, with no permanent dwelling, no job, and no coffee. Perhaps, if we look hard enough, we might find that even the constraint of living a life -- at all -- is also adjustable.)
They can shift their daily schedule e.g. 30 minutes earlier and peacefully drink their coffee at home. They also should eat something at home or on their way, because hurrying in a cold morning with an empty stomach is not good. Source: personal experience. I did that for months as a student until I passed out one day in class.
If they don't like waiting for the train in the cold, they probably can find a warm place near the station, and wait there a little.
2) brush teeth
3) brew coffee
?
In other words, these product decisions aren't really made on the rationale that internet connected coffee makers make sense from the standpoint of a consumer who simply wants coffee made...
It's more: "let's make smart coffee makers so that we can sell to 2 markets:
... and make more profits for ourselves".What hope do normies have?
Sometimes I like the idea of preheating oven on my way home but then I get home and forget about it.
My LG washer/dryer tell me when loads are done and when someone lets wet clothes sit in the washer. This is priceless. But yeah they are probably profiling my house.
None, without people like us in their families who are able and willing to help.
We as computer people need to internalize and accept the idea that helping our immediate and even extended family with technology is now part of defending human freedom. And we need to form ourselves into the best helpers we can be by learning how to teach and communicate well.
I am able and willing to help my parents get off of a lot of the spyware bullshit they have throughout their house, but they don't want to hear it. They liked the connected stuff and I think that they think I'm a little weird when I push back about why we can't trust corporations like Google or Microsoft to do everything.
"Nomad," the guy from the article, was already administering his parents' home LAN.
How do you get there? "Mom and Dad, we're going to set up your home network so that it's blended with my home network. To all the machines in your house and mine, it'll look like they're on the same network together. That'll make it easier for me to help you with any tech problems you're having, on your computer or on any smart device. The connection between our houses will be encrypted and secure" You're installing a router/firewall for them and adding to your WireGuard overlay network, but you're not using any of those words to tell them what's going on.
What to do next? "How was watching TV last night from {$TIMESTAMP_A} to {$TIMESTAMP_B}? Yeah, my network sentinel detected that your TV was sending your viewing habits out to somewhere on the Internet and warned me and blocked it. I can't tell what you were watching, but {$TV_BRAND} sure can." You're monitoring their LAN via the router/firewall you've set up, but you are again not using technical language.
Wherever spying is invisible and frictionless, make it loud and incessant. And continue to provide value to the family on the shared overlay network. Photo and home video backups, media server (it's like Netflix!), mutual offsite buddy backups, password management, a local Minecraft server for the kids and the cousins.
Cultivate a family network garden that is good enough to consider leaving the leviathans behind and build walls around it that are high enough to commit to leaving the leviathans behind for what is now a garden inside a family network castle.
Recommending they turn off ACR and other spyware on their TV is based on recent reporting is good and backed up by said reporting. Probably even recommending against too-good-to-be-true connected doorbells even.
Meanwhile, telling them not to use a first-party Google, Amazon, or Apple smart home speakers is a bit questionable when there's been pretty good audits over the years that show they really do only do wake word detection. You'll just sound like a crazy person if you can't point to some reporting on a device doing bad.
Folks be crazy.
I don't need voice-activated lights for the basement for when I head down there with my arms full of laundry, or with a bunch of food to put into the freezer, or whatever shit I'm carrying. I don't need them to turn themselves back off after a time, either.
I mean: I could use any of a wide array of motion sensors, but they'll turn the lights on even when I'm just working in the kitchen near the basement stairs. (Or maybe I could use a beam curtain! Yeah! Now they only respond when a beam breaks, instead of when I'm working in the kitchen near the basement stairs!)
Or I could just put the shit down and flip the switch.
Or: Plan ahead, and flip the switch in advance. And then just flip it back off when I'm done down there.
On a long-enough timeline, someone will find a way to make a point of explaining that any combination of a lack of planning and a lack of effort is completely and utterly inexcusable. That every action should should be planned, and that every manual effort has value.
But I chose this path anyway, and I like it this way. I invited the spies into my home very deliberately. The basement light automations work great, by the way, and the default non-voice UI is the same, plain, old-school light switch that the house came with.
(I also chose to carry an always-on pocket supercomputer with me wherever I go even though I have no way to observe what that thing is really doing at any given time.)
I find the idea that you'd connect things like these to the Internet absolutely insane. I do think we're past the point where being able to ensure you don't leak data isn't compatible with functioning in the modern world, but trying to limit the things that have Internet access to systems where you have control just seems sensible.
I'm ammused people call these "smart speakers".
Use their real name: Smart Microphones.
Alexa = Amazons microphone.
Yes they are constantly listening, but this is just for the watch word (as a cue to start listening/sending) but they lack the on-device ability to convert anything else to text on their own. All they can do on their own is listen out for the watch word.
Certain smart TVs on the other hand, are known to constantly stream audio back to their HQ as they don't have on-board watchword detection.