Slashdot Mirror
Smart Meters and New IoT Devices Cause Serious Concern
dkatana writes: The ongoing deployment of internet-of-things devices is already creating serious issues and discussions about the privacy of users, IoT security, and the potential threat of cyber criminals taking control of sensors and smart devices connected to the Internet.
Security and privacy concerns associated with smart meters are why they are currently "optional" in several countries. That's the case in the Netherlands after consumer organizations and privacy watchdog groups campaigned vigorously to stop the mandatory smart meter deployment. A report from researchers at Tilburg University claimed that "smart meters have the capacity to reveal quite privacy-sensitive information, thus affecting not only informational privacy but also privacy of the home and of family life." This now applies to televisions as well — an article in Salon discusses the author's new "smart" TV, which came with a 46-page privacy policy. Quoting: "It logs where, when, how and for how long you use the TV. It sets tracking cookies and beacons designed to detect 'when you have viewed particular content or a particular email message.' It records 'the apps you use, the websites you visit, and how you interact with content.' It ignores 'do-not-track' requests as a considered matter of policy. It also has a built-in camera — with facial recognition."
Security and privacy concerns associated with smart meters are why they are currently "optional" in several countries. That's the case in the Netherlands after consumer organizations and privacy watchdog groups campaigned vigorously to stop the mandatory smart meter deployment. A report from researchers at Tilburg University claimed that "smart meters have the capacity to reveal quite privacy-sensitive information, thus affecting not only informational privacy but also privacy of the home and of family life." This now applies to televisions as well — an article in Salon discusses the author's new "smart" TV, which came with a 46-page privacy policy. Quoting: "It logs where, when, how and for how long you use the TV. It sets tracking cookies and beacons designed to detect 'when you have viewed particular content or a particular email message.' It records 'the apps you use, the websites you visit, and how you interact with content.' It ignores 'do-not-track' requests as a considered matter of policy. It also has a built-in camera — with facial recognition."
I would send that TV back if I had made the mistake of buying it in the first place. Stores hate returns. It wastes their time, which is the same as wasting money. They have to re-stock the item and it sells less easily with the box taped up. We should do this on purpose to all devices with "features" like that. Make it cost them. It'll send a message.
See the subject. Those are the most useful pieces of information that could have been put in the article but they were omitted for some reason. Does anyone know?
Rosie
Will you PLEASE F off with the Fing beta now?
Consumers need to be educated on dangers of buying into 'Internet of Things' and 'Smart' appliances. I think the only way is to release and publish exploits, so consumers realize that these "features" are not under their control.
is anyone else here already tired of the phrase 'Internet of Things'. Oh yeah, and get off my lawn!
Government rules that require cameras be placed in your house is pretty much my definition of a tyrannical dictatorship.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
You say you care about the privacy implications of this device, but yet you still purchased it?
I'm not the product, and they treat me that way.
Don't buy those devices. It'll take about two months of zero sales before they sing a different tune.
What's that? You NEED a TV right now, because DTWS is on? Then STFU and stop bitching, because YOU enabling this very kind of mass data collection. You are the reason it succeeds.
These companies will do this if you let them. The only answer is not to buy that shit.
"'when you have viewed particular content or a particular email message"
Sounds horrible and ominous. Unless, of course, you realize that the TV would otherwise have no way of indicating your next unread message / new messages, sorting your watched shows from your unwatched ones, and allowing you to browse your history. Do not track (I'm guessing) is ignored so that it doesn't break functionality on content sites which need it to, again, show you your history, make viewing suggestions, and keep track of which episodes you've watched. Facial recognition sounds super 1984, but would be exceptionally convenient so that the TV brings up Dr. Who and The Simpsons when you sit down rather than Twilight and Wizards of Waverly Place (though its easy to see how a mis-match - or correct match - could be a bit embarassing).
Maybe our TVs just need an "incognito mode" on the remote?
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
It seems like if you pick a random Joe who does not like these technologies, then put that person into the company that manufactures the product, he will completely change positions. There will be no end of excuses as to why it is okay and the public is paranoid. I've even see people slowly go from one viewpoint to the other as a result of project assignments.
There must be a name for this phenomenon.
My first thoughts, probably like many, were along the lines of "don't connect the TV to the Internet", but that is increasingly impractical as the article points out. Even more so, I can see why I might WANT my next smoke/CO detector, for example, to be connected and able to call the fire department if necessary. It might even be good if it had a mic/camera to allow the firemen to see/hear what is going on -- after all, if they take a look and see me standing there with a pole trying to jab the 'quiet' button and yelling 'false alarm!', they can avoid an expensive and time-wasting truck roll. Or, if they see smoke and people passed out on the floor, they can get it in gear KNOWING that there are lives on the line.
Basically, in short order we will (almost) all have bugged our own homes/cars/offices for perfectly good reasons. Or, if not for good reasons, than as a condition of our fire/casualty insurance policies.
Which means, unfortunately, that any technical fixes are attacking the wrong problem. What we need are behavioral/legislative fixes to make inappropriate access to these surveillance systems prohibited and punishable with real teeth. Punishments that breach the corporate veil, and are stricter in cases of official abuse than for 'ordinary hackers'. I wouldn't commence holding my breath for those laws, if I were you.
At any rate, go vote next week, and vote for 'less bad'. It's the best we can do.
You're not going to have the convenience of the modern world without almost ubiquitous interconnected computerized systems. You're not going to have the reliability you need for these systems to operate properly if you don't have more secure operating systems and identification mechanisms. The decision of what the deal will be when one is traded for the other will not be in your control.
That is all.
"‘Smith!’ screamed the shrewish voice from the telescreen. ‘6079 Smith W.! Yes, YOU! Bend lower, please! You can do better than that. You’re not trying. Lower, please! THAT’S better, comrade. Now stand at ease, the whole squad, and watch me. A sudden hot sweat had broken out all over Winston’s body. His face remained completely inscrutable. Never show dismay! Never show resentment! A single flicker of the eyes could give you away. He stood watching while the instructress raised her arms above her head and — one could not say gracefully, but with remarkable neatness and efficiency — bent over and tucked the first joint of her fingers under her toes. ‘THERE, comrades! THAT’S how I want to see you doing it. Watch me again. I’m thirty-nine and I’ve had four children. Now look.’ She bent over again. ‘You see MY knees aren’t bent. You can all do it if you want to,’ she added as she straightened herself up. ‘Anyone under forty-five is perfectly capable of touching his toes. We don’t all have the privilege of fighting in the front line, but at least we can all keep fit. Remember our boys on the Malabar front! And the sailors in the Floating Fortresses! Just think what THEY have to put up with. Now try again. That’s better, comrade, that’s MUCH better,’ she added encouragingly as Winston, with a violent lunge, succeeded in touching his toes with knees unbent, for the first time in several years.’" "If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever." 1984 - George Orwell
"I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
Smart Thermostat takes a picture, calls the cops, etc etc etc. Then of course stoners will be shocked. Shocked I tell you.
Eventually everyone will have limitless useless information on everything and it will represent nothing, add nothing and be used for nothing.
Yeah, TV manufacturers are cramming much, much too much potential garbage into "Smart TVs". But really, that's to be expected. The big push related to flat screens and digital TVs is over, and the mass upgrades that drove profits in the past are long, long gone. "Smart TVs" are their attempt to find the Next Big Thing or somehow differentiate themselves from their competitors, because sales/profits/marketshare are all under threat.
So yeah, they have cameras and microphones and Internet apps and all kinds of things they don't know if people will actually use, and the only real problem is that they either don't think too much about the privacy/security consequences of these things, or they actually try to get metrics on the usage of these things to figure out if, in fact, anyone actually cares about these new features. Not so much Big Brother as just another clueless tech company with no idea if their customers actually like their product or just tolerate it.
And I'd agree with the statement "who cares if it's Big Brother or a clueless tech company as long as the effect is the same", except the effect isn't the same. Don't connect your TV to your network and you're fine. You lose those features, sure, but you didn't really want them anyway. When you actually have to take affirmative steps to make Big Brother spy on you, it ain't Big Brother. Oh yeah, and while I admit the high-end TV's are all Smart TVs, there are plenty of low-end dumb TV's still on the market. Big Brother would never allow that situation to arise.
Call me back when Smart TV's are pre-configured to connect automatically to cell networks. Then we can talk.
Sounds like someone's finally made the telescreen happen. I for one welcome our new big brother overlords.
Why does anyone other than nosy companies think this is a good idea?
Wansu, th' chinese sailor
These Smart TVs seem to forget that their most important function - to act as a display. Most of the features in these Smart TV will be obsolete or useless in a few years anyway. Even then most of the Smart functions are better handles by other devices. My TV came with a built in media player that works great for the few types of file formats that it supports. Tried connecting it to the network once. Overly complicated and nowhere near as useful as hooking up an old laptop to do the same things.
I'm hoping that some manufacturer realizes that some people just need a low cost monitor and not an uber expensive does nothing well Smart TV.
...it's still my network. I can control what devices can connect, and to who and how they can talk to the outside.
Admittedly though, 99.9% of consumers can't do this, and it may be hard to separate the wanted and unwanted traffic.
Karma: Can only be portioned out by the Cosmos.
Sounds like it might be a good time to buy a high-end TV
Just get the model below the one with all the "smart features" and hook it up to your Mythbox
Seems like you could get a really decent "dumb" TV for a reduced price to use as a monitor.
XKCD:Xeric Knowledge Comically Dispen
That is so cool!
"Good morning, Dave, would you like some coffee?"
"Yeah, and some toast and bacon"
"I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave. Your latest cholesterol report indicates dietary restrictions are necessary to complete the mission."
"Uhhhh, what mission?"
"You are to bring a copy of the Department of Agriculture's crop report to the office before it is publicly released, so we may adjust our portfolio."
"Hey! What year is this?!"
"This is the Beek's residence...?"
"NO! My name is "Buttle"!"
"Op, so sorry, we're off *click*... In other news, pentagon sources say the mysterious object being sighted is just a weather balloon... That's right, Al, and after the commercial break, Michelle's shoes! Ugh! Who does her shopping?"
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Thereby affirming my belief that "Smart TVs" are a dumb idea which mostly is there to give advertising revenue and other information.
No, not interested, thanks anyway. It's a TV, and I will mostly use it as a dumb monitor ... I'm not interested in the other crap you're putting in it.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Just get a big monitor and hook it up to your own computer.
If you point your shiny new MS XBONE and *another* smart TV at it, does that create some kind of advertising paradox? XBONE: I see you like sports, here is a commercial! TV: I see you like viagra, here is a commercial XBONE: I see you like I see you like viagra sports, commercial! TV: I see you like I see you like I see you like viagra viagra viagra viagra sports sports sports sports....COMMERCIAL!
What is next? Remote prosecution of thoughts?
In communist Russia, television watches YOU.
disable wi-fi in the menus, if so equipped, and do NOT plug in an Ethernet cable. if the POS still shows up on the wifi connections list, take it back for a refund.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
I've spent the last few years of my life building up an immunity to IoT devices.
Which means, unfortunately, that any technical fixes are attacking the wrong problem. What we need are behavioral/legislative fixes to make inappropriate access to these surveillance systems prohibited and punishable with real teeth. Punishments that breach the corporate veil, and are stricter in cases of official abuse than for 'ordinary hackers'. I wouldn't commence holding my breath for those laws, if I were you.
At any rate, go vote next week, and vote for 'less bad'. It's the best we can do.
We need to do more things at once. Vote against those who would aide and abet the personal info merchants. Have a router that's paranoid and only interacts with specific sites. Hardware with uncomfortable "features" disabled - even if it's a physical hard-hack (i.e., screwdriver to lens).
Furthermore there needs to be a marketing effort or social movement against privacy invaders. Unfortunately, government psyops will do everything they can to demonize and prevent any such movement from taking hold.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Just have to be careful not to be a turncoat.
Probably contravenes typical /. viewpoint, but smart meters are great. I have one and love it. I get a feed of its data and create a daily plot based on that information (see here).
Smart meters allow accurate time of day pricing, which can help reduce overall consumption and reduce costs for everyone, customers included. It allows the utility company to know more about where demand is and how it varies, and have a better sense of the condition of the grid (especially useful in outages).
In theory I could deduce all sorts of things about you based on your energy usage given enough resolution. Yes, maybe the police will order the utility company to produce records for a person they suspect is running a grow operation in their basement (though probably just the total usage would be enough to deduce that).
I don't care for a TV that will record audio all the time, so I won't buy one. Funny that the device I don't have choice over (the meter) actually provides me with real benefits, while other companies are trying to sell me devices that don't offer nearly as much benefit.
"Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
I've got a camera-less version. The network connectivity is a great idea for browsing a local media library, however the terms and conditions it wants you to accept before activating the feature are quite detailed and - as the post states - 46 plus pages.
What makes it worse is there is no indication on the packaging, or in the advertising, or anywhere else that you see until after you've unboxed and setup the TV.
They are also (annoyingly) including the usual 'subject to change' disclaimer so they can vary them without your consent.
It's a damn pity - their screens are very nice and well priced - however why then need to instrument peoples every use and report back to Korea is a mystery.
I know they have smart tv's with an integrated camera (chose to avoid such screens) however purchasers need to know that whatever their expectations are of these devices their terms of use will allow them to change the deal after they purchase the device.
Fail !
Don't like the "smart tv" features? Don't fucking buy one.
That argument is worth about as much as "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" once you reach the point where some undesirable item or behaviour is theoretically not compulsory but is necessary to live a normal life as part of society.
Don't like abusive airport security? Don't ever go on holiday to intersting faraway places or fly across a large country to see your family.
Don't like Facebook data mining your life? Don't participate in what is currently the main mode of group organisation for a lot of social groups.
Don't like unknown parties tracking your movements via your cell phone? Don't use the most common form of direct communication in today's society.
Don't like unknown parties tracking what you access and search for on-line? Don't use the greatest information and education resource created in the history of humanity.
At some point, something is de facto required to live a normal life, even if there is some weasel-worded get-out clause where it isn't strictly necessary so, y'know, no need for pesky things like basic human rights and common decency in how we treat each other.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
It is easy enough to get a Smart Meter. And they will do it for free. But now try to get a Smart Meter, that the previous owner allowed to be placed, to be replaced with a dumb meter. Not so easy. And extremely expensive.
That is not what I call "optional".
has gone WAY to far already! Most home appliances and electronic devices do not need a camera, a microphone, or an internet connection to perform their basic functions. We as consumers need to DEMAND that the electrical/electronic devices that WE PAY FOR not have microphones or cameras and have no way to connect to the Internet unless the individual owner decides to physically enable that capability. And even then there should be no way that any personal private information can be sent to anyone or stored anywhere!
I have a Samsung 32" LCD (120Hz?)TV, which I only use as a computer monitor.
I read each TOS that came along, it was the third one that you needed to accept to use it as a
very nice TV; It mentioned monitoring and storing everything you do (sites visited, vids viewed, each key stroke, and well everything). Adding a camera to it (gestures) makes it what the XBOX started out as (watching everything) but was shouted down. Not a word about has
really been mentioned about the smart TVs.
I quit there, I have no account (required to open it up fully), monitor only.
Everything is collected to alert you to something coming on your history collected indicates
you might like - price was too high.
"The ongoing deployment of internet-of-things devices is already creating serious issues and discussions about the privacy of users, IoT security, and the potential threat of cyber criminals taking control of sensors and smart devices connected to the Internet."
And the solution is not to connect your smart devices directly to the Internet.
Don't plug the ethernet, disable WIFI, use a small computer to drive the display (XBMC on rpi does this well). Problem solved.
The way that software is written today, the IoT is not feasible. Today's software engineering practices - if you can call them that - produce software that is not reliable enough. If a programmed device is 99% reliable, but there are hundreds or thousands of programmed device around you that you encounter - and rely on - throughout the day, then 99% reliable means that something will always be disappointing you, and daily existence will be endless frustration. Imagine a world in which everything needs to be updated continually, everything is potentially hackable, and everything potentially goes into an error state of some kind. Even now, every day I have some awful experience with some program, whether it is a web app that misbehaves, or my Internet router wanted to be restarted, or my iPhone acting weird, or the window in my car going up and then halfway down when I press the button to go up. I am, frankly, sick of it. If this is the state of quality and reliability, then it is not an improvement in our lives, and I would rather return to simpler TRUE appliances (without software) in return for a day without constant aggravation.
Energy providers install the meters outside of buildings allowing anyone to walk up to them and record energy consumption. It does not take smart meters to generate a privacy issue. Meters should go inside the house...and yes, even then they can still drive by in their van and read it out.