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
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.
"‘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."
[citation needed]
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
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
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.