Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Samsung, LG Smartwatches Give Up Personal Data To Researchers

Posted by Soulskill on from the new-places-from-which-to-leak-data dept.

An anonymous reader sends word that security researchers have been able to extract personal information from a pair of smartwatches: the LG G Watch and the Samsung Gear 2 Neo. The G Watch gave up calendar information, pedometer data, and the user's email address, while the Gear 2 Neo gave up health data, emails, messages, and contact information. The researchers said it wasn't very difficult to get the data, in part because it wasn't encrypted. "The Gear 2 Neo uses Samsung's Tizen operating system, while the LG G Watch is one of several models that uses Google's Android Wear operating system. The researchers obtained the data both by poking through the watches' files and finding traces of watch activity on the Samsung Android smartphone to which they were linked. The researchers also have begun testing the Apple Watch."

7 of 46 comments (clear)

  1. Was this a remote attack? Did the have the watch? by kcitren · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The researchers obtained the data both by poking through the watches' files and finding traces of watch activity on the Samsung Android smartphone to which they were linked.

    So, they had both the watch and the connected phone. I'm not really concerned about this. If this was a remote access thing, I'd be a little worried.

  2. Redundant technology by LewekLeonek · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Does anyone actually buy them? I think a smart watch is redundant, until it entirely be able to replace a cell phone. To better understand the market I did some quick research - http://www.smartwatchgroup.com... So they sold 6.8 millions of these gadgets in 2014 in US. I'm not impressed with these numbers. The only actual usage so far is: - fitness crowd - cool people that buy anything new that comes out for bragging rights - gifts for people who already have everything else

    1. Re:Redundant technology by Minupla · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I've been wearing one since Christmas (thanks Santa!) and I have to say I don't think I'd wanna give it up now. It's a nice to have definitely, rather then a necessity, but so is my smart phone.

      I have the type of job with double and triple stacked meetings 8 hrs a day and it's REALLY nice to be able to glance at my watch and find out where I need to be next, what the dial in for the conference bridge is etc without having to pull my phone out of my pocket, unlock it, etc. Means I'm late for fewer meetings.

      It's also a lot more socially acceptable in my office at least to glance at a watch and check to see if that new email your phone is buzzing about is important enough to excuse yourself from the meeting or not. Also being able to screen a call without the fuss of pulling out a phone. Glance at the watch, see it's important, excuse myself from the meeting and pull my phone out on the way is a lot less disruptive.

      So ya, it's a nice to have, but it's quickly becoming a high priority nice to have. I miss it when I forget to put it on in the morning (like today) because I have too little caffeine in my blood.

      Like every other early adopter device, it's got bugs but it's over the "more trouble then it's worth" hurdle for me at least.

      Min

      --
      On the whole, I find that I prefer Slashdot posts to twitter ones because I don't get limited to 140 chars before
    2. Re:Redundant technology by LaurenCates · · Score: 2

      I also wear one (Samsung).

      When the Bluetooth is disconnected, it alerts me. This means I left my phone in the house and I need to go back and get it.

      When my customer texts me and requires only a "Yes" or "No" while I'm trying to de-plane, that is a real time and annoyance saver to be able to use one of the pre-programmed Quick Replies.

      Looking at time is much easier and socially acceptable on a watch than a phone.

      The step counter reminds me that I've been sitting too much (I have to access it, but it's still more convenient than to do on my phone) and should move around more.

      The stopwatch/timer gets used for interval training. Better than taking the phone off my arm and fiddle with it or having a stopwatch ready.

      I like it, I use it plenty, but I wouldn't say everyone needs one. I even argued with my customer (who doesn't wear a watch) that a smartwatch would be a waste of money for him.

       

      --
      Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
    3. Re:Redundant technology by King_TJ · · Score: 2

      Yes, people buy them by the millions.... You're not impressed that 6.8 million were sold in 2014 (the first year this stuff really went mainstream, with lots of version 1.0 products that will get more compelling as the years pass)?

      I have the Apple Watch myself and sure it's redundant -- but that's sort of the point. I mean, in the era of everyone carrying around cellphones which ALL display the date and time, any wrist worn watch is redundant anyway!

      The advantages are ones of convenience, primarily. People tend to keep their phone in a pocket or purse, and it's less convenient to pull it out (probably having to press a button on it to wake it, too) just to check the time, than to glance at a wristwatch. But also, you shouldn't discount the fact that these watches go places the phones don't go. You can take an Apple Watch with you in the shower, for example, or even swimming in a pool. It's relatively waterproof, unlike a phone. And besides, do you have a pocket that would safely secure your phone on your pair of swim-trunks? Around the house, it gives me the freedom to leave my phone on a charger, inside, too, while retaining the usefulness of some of the phone's apps. (I put a wi-fi router out in my garage as a range extender, so my watch stays on my home wi-fi network while I'm mowing the lawn or working on the car.)

      The "bragging rights" thing is severely over-rated..... Unless you're talking about something insanely expensive like that Apple Watch "edition" (which is really only being bought as a piece of bling by celebrities, athletes and fashion magazine folks), most people don't really notice or CARE what you're wearing on your wrist. I don't think a single person has commented on my Apple Watch since I've had it, and I ride on the Metro every day where hundreds of people have the opportunity to say something about it if they wanted to. (I went with the black sport band option, so it doesn't really stand out that much.)

      But sure, it's also of use to the fitness crowd ... a large segment of the market that I'm not really a part of. And these watches are capable of doing a little more than just telling the time, even when the phone isn't tethered to them. You can load playlists of MP3 or AAC music into mine, for example, to listen to over a bluetooth headset. So it eliminates a need to carry a separate iPod player around.

  3. Re:Huh? They had full control of the hardware. by rsborg · · Score: 2

    These researchers had physical control of the hardware in question and were able to extract unencrypted data? That must have been difficult.

    You can't do that with an iPhone. Hardware access that's in a locked mode shouldn't necessarily give you access to encrypted data. Oh, in one case at least it simply wasn't encrypted. Health data. Nice.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  4. Re:No Shit Sherlock by Krojack · · Score: 2

    It's less about who cares but more about the fact these companies continue to sell our data without asking if they can or at least telling us they are going to.

    This also leaves the door open to malware on the phone to scrap up this personal data such as address, email and all your contacts and send it to Sasha Konovalov in Russia.