Slashdot Mirror


Samsung Says Their TVs Aren't Really Spying On You

lightbox32 writes "Samsung has finally responded to an article recently published by HD Guru titled 'Is your TV watching you?' [See this related Slashdot post] which discussed the fact that new features in Samsung's top 2012 models — including built-in microphones, HDTV camera, wireless and wired Internet connection, built-in browser with voice to text conversion, face recognition and more — could be used to collect unprecedented personal information and invade our privacy. Samsung has now provided their privacy policy, which may or may not lay the issue to rest." I vote for "not" — conspiracy theories about mandatory (or just secret) surveillance equipment in consumer electronics is just too persistent, even when the technical capabilities turn out to be a hoax; when the equipment is actually all in place and the user is protected only by a corporate honor policy, it's hard to be sanguine. (I recall there was a much rumored secret capability for law enforcement agencies to secretly and remotely turn on the internal microphones in PCs meeting the PC 97 spec, and this was an integral part of the plan. Since the government insists that telecom equipment have built-in backdoors, why should that sound all that crazy?)

16 of 171 comments (clear)

  1. Paranoid? by ottawanker · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, if you're so paranoid, get some tape and cover over the camera and microphone, or take it apart and disconnect it.

    But, maybe even light bulbs have cameras and microphones in them now, using the powerlines to transmit the data back..

    1. Re:Paranoid? by anglico · · Score: 5, Informative
      FTFA

      "Should the TV owner choose not to use these features, the camera and microphone can be disabled. Users can check if the camera and microphone are activated from the TV’s settings menu. As an added precaution, the camera can be rotated and tucked into the bezel of the TV. Once tucked away, the camera only captures a black image."

    2. Re:Paranoid? by epyT-R · · Score: 5, Insightful

      what about the mic? if the switch is software it can be remotely accessed. the switches need to be physical.

    3. Re:Paranoid? by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Perhaps because of 1984, but perhaps because that TV has become a major part of people's reality and has so far only been one way.

      Or because TVs are more likely to be found in bedrooms and other places where people would very much not want to be seen by others. Unlike laptops (which can be closed and/or moved), those TVs are always pointed so that you can see them from the bed. This means that if it has a camera, it can watch you have sex, it can watch you watch porn (which, Slashdot readers notwithstanding, is more likely on a TV than a computer), and (if the angle is wide enough) it can watch you get dressed in the morning.

      A TV in a common room with a camera is potentially acceptable, but making it a standard feature of every TV would be a catastrophically bad idea. There are some places that cameras just do not belong. Like my bathroom.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    4. Re:Paranoid? by treval · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You are assuming the tape you put over the camera is not transparent at IR or UV light frequencies - think of the Sony 'night-vision' cameras that could see through clothes.

      You are also assuming the gain of the microphone can't be turned up remotely to hear enough. Some decent signal processing can remove a lot of the underlying noise to recover the what is being said.

      Ask yourself too, how many owners are going to keep the TV firmware updated to deal with the inevitable security holes that will be found?

      Personally, I think it's not paranoid at all to question the pros and cons of these new 'features', inevitable as they may be.

      --
      Your attitude is infectious...
    5. Re:Paranoid? by Salgak1 · · Score: 4, Funny

      But, maybe even light bulbs have cameras and microphones in them now, using the powerlines to transmit the data back..

      Well, THAT certainly explains the Incandescent Bulb Ban, the installation of "Smart Meters", and that huge new NSA facility in Utah. But we need to connect it to HAARP, Chemtrails, and Obama's Birth Certificate for true conspiracy greatness. Extra points if you work in Black Helicopters, the Rothschilds, or the Tri-Lateral Commission.....

    6. Re:Paranoid? by DigiShaman · · Score: 4, Funny

      You dated my ex-gf didn't you? No joke! Her mother was your typical trailer trash alcoholic with a chain smoking habit. She was also bit wonky in the head. One day as my ex and I were sitting down on the sofa, I asked if her TV was broke or something. It's because she would cover the unit with a table cloth. Her response.

      "When I watch TV, they are watching me."

      The answer was in a serious tone. Talk about being ahead of her time. Not too far off.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    7. Re:Paranoid? by hamburger+lady · · Score: 4, Funny

      doesn't like every laptop now have a built-in microphone, an HDTV camera, a wireless and wired Internet connection, a browser and software with voice to text conversion, face recognition and more?

      we're gonna need a lot of tape.

      shit, maybe this story was a plant by Big Tape! 3M has deep pockets. that's the real conspiracy.

      --

      ---
      Is this the MPAA? Is this the RIAA? Is this the DMCA? I thought it was the USA!
    8. Re:Paranoid? by Frohboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Perhaps because of 1984, but perhaps because that TV has become a major part of people's reality and has so far only been one way.

      Or because TVs are more likely to be found in bedrooms and other places where people would very much not want to be seen by others. Unlike laptops (which can be closed and/or moved), those TVs are always pointed so that you can see them from the bed. This means that if it has a camera, it can watch you have sex, it can watch you watch porn (which, Slashdot readers notwithstanding, is more likely on a TV than a computer), and (if the angle is wide enough) it can watch you get dressed in the morning.

      A TV in a common room with a camera is potentially acceptable, but making it a standard feature of every TV would be a catastrophically bad idea. There are some places that cameras just do not belong. Like my bathroom.

      While I distlike the idea of TVs in bedrooms (unless you're a college kid whose only private space is the bedroom), I have to strongly disagree with the idea that a TV with a camera (that can watch you without your knowledge) in a common room is even remotely acceptable. Most of the time that I spend interacting with my child is in the living room, with the TV in plain sight, on standby (unless we're watching Sesame Street). I am strongly opposed to the very idea that someone could be watching or listening to what I'm teaching my children. (For what it's worth, I don't have anything to hide, assuming a secular upbringing loosely based on the "golden rule" isn't outlawed anytime soon, but if it were to be outlawed, I wouldn't want my TV ratting me out.)

      To be honest, I would rather have a camera in the bedroom. I don't particularly care about shadowy figures watching me have sex with my wife. (We enjoy it, but we're not especially camera-friendly, and we don't do anything that you couldn't find much more professional "amateurs" doing online.) The values that we instill in our children are personal and way more important than our naked asses.

    9. Re:Paranoid? by bmo · · Score: 4, Informative

      You misunderstand. I'm not saying that the government wants free porn. I'm saying that as soon as the cameras are there, your love life is only a quick hack away from people who do.

      Indeed. There are webcams all over the net that people have put in their houses as "more effective" baby monitors and such.

      And they are wide open to the internet.

      Are you bored?

      http://pastebin.com/fDkTWZGX

      Trendnet cameras. Wide open to the world. And so is your life.

      --
      BMO

  2. Marketing Opportunity - Privacy Star Compliance by ohnocitizen · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Trust in corporate ethics is so incredibly low. Privacy expectations plummet every year. If I was a hardware manufcaturer, I'd fund an independent organization (like Consumer Reports) and say "use this money to investigate which new devices coming out violate consumer privacy, and issue ratings". If we can have Energy Star compliance, why not Privacy Star compliance? If all my tvs had Privacy Star stickers, and my competitors did not, +1 for me and my business.

  3. In Soviet Russia television is watching YOU! by sourcerror · · Score: 5, Funny

    In Soviet Russia television is watching YOU!

  4. Of course... by Terrasque · · Score: 5, Funny

    Samsung Says Their TVs Aren't Really Spying On You

    Of course they'll be saying that. They'd be crazy NOT to say it.

    I mean, they have enough patent lawsuits from Apple already.

    --
    It's The Golden Rule: "He who has the gold makes the rules."
  5. Such an incredible opportunity... by Genda · · Score: 5, Interesting

    For someone to create a personal firewall that prevents unwanted access to your appliances and unwanted data transmission from your appliances. It should be reasonably easy to build such a device, sell it for a reasonable price and let everyone know that they now have complete control over what their appliance does and when. I'd buy one in a minute!

    The only way to prevent oher people from taking inappropriate advantage is to eliminate the opportunity.

  6. Here I am... by Jawnn · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...brain the size of a planet and they ask me to spy on you through this crappy little camera in my bezel. Call that job satisfaction, 'cause I don't.

  7. It's not a new idea by n5vb · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I vote for "not" — conspiracy theories about mandatory (or just secret) surveillance equipment in consumer electronics is just too persistent, even when the technical capabilities turn out to be a hoax; when the equipment is actually all in place and the user is protected only by a corporate honor policy, it's hard to be sanguine.

    Considering that "viewscreens" that allowed The Party to watch people in their homes were an integral part of the story of Nineteen Eighty-Four, it's arguable that people who are familiar with that story are probably inclined to at least think briefly about the possibility. (In the book, the "viewscreens" couldn't be turned off, although it's fair to say that most pieces of modern tech aren't exactly ever "off" unless you completely disconnect all sources of power, so this may be 6 of one, half a dozen of the other.)

    Then again, in this age of the almighty corporation, how much is a simple corporate assertion of goodwill really worth?