An investigation by Gamers Nexus found LG smart TVs sweep local networks to map phones and nearby devices. Tests also showed the sets can capture microphone audio with the screen off — they then upload data once reconnected to the internet.

top 92 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 220 points 2 months ago (31 children)

Secretly recording conversations in peoples homes sounds like it should be against the law in a number of countries.

Imagine someone working for the government, security services, or a defence contractor. I suspect LG may be in trouble with a number of National Security agencies.

  • source
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [+] 164 points 2 months ago (20 children)
  • [–] 36 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

    Not shareholders. Decision makers. Upper management. Shareholders should pay in share value (the financial penalty to the corporations should be high enough to affect that), bu the personal an criminal responsibility belongs to managers, CEO in particular.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    There should at least be something resembling an attempt of investigating, who, where, and when signed an order to implement this shit into their products. That way they will at least think twice if they want to risk the chance of being held personally responsible.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 47 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (17 children)

    Shareholders must be held responsible individually

    So, are you personally on the hook here because the company managing your pension fund is holding stocks in LG? Because that technically makes you a shareholder as it was bought with your money, right?

    Edit: not sure why I get downvoted, this is a legitimate concern/nuance to the debate. The managing company doesn't own these stocks so they're not the shareholders, that's the people whose money they are managing, but these people are not directly in control of the funds. Who is the liable party in this?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    The highest level employee/officer who had knowledge of it should be held responsible

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    You mean the CBO[^1]? Because the higher level officers didn't know anything about it and you can't prove they did.

    [^1]: Chief Blame Officer

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago* (3 children)

    The fact that a pension fund can hold shareholds is crazy by itself, also, is the pension found a company or managed by your state? It shouldn't really be a thing in first place

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    is the pension fund a company or managed by your state?

    Both in my case, as there are both the government pension fund that is mandatory and the one used by my employer which uses one of the large primary pension institutions in my country.

    Is it a bit weird that I don't just manage all my pensions myself? Yes, a bit. But it's how its done in my country and it has some tax benefits compared to getting the money in hand and investing myself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

    If I don't get executive say in what happens at the company, I am not included in liability. I am not allowed to sit on the damn board with my pension fund.

    Executives and controlling board members get held personally liable. It really is as simple as that. If you are in the meetings, and you get a vote, you are liable. There is absolutely no slippery slope fallacy here.

    Any bullshit "uhm actually you technically are a shareholder" is just trying to ward off people having to take responsibility for their decisions. (also, in many pension schemas you aren't actually the shareholders, the investment fund technically is and you are just given the license to decide how they invest those funds and get a portion of the payout, but it is different than manually retail investing for example)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    That might stop this madness.

    See the thing is if your pension also funds a murder company does outsourcing who manages it not make you at least a little culpable? I think it does and i think the only way to stop this madness is for a little justice to come your way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    does outsourcing who manages it not make you at least a little culpable

    What if i have no control over who manages it? I have two, one is government managed and mandatory, the other is part of my salary (and mandatory) and who manages my company paid pension is decided by my employer. I have no control of either aside from general risk profile and high level market groups on my company paid pension (e.g. "tech" or "renewable energy").

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago*

    Also, which shareholders? Shareholders have no say in the business decisions outside of the annual voting for board members and whatever broad issues are brought up for a vote. If someone holds stock and then sells it before a vote, are they responsible for the business decisions? If a swing trader bought and then sold in one day/week/month (even at a loss), how much is their liability? If someone sells their shares just before a vote, then buys them again after, are they liable?

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 28 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (6 children)

    Recording without consent is very much a crime in any two-party state, but my guess is that the TOS that people click past to use the TV gives them permission to record you. If it didn't, they would be in big legal hot water.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Clicking through ToS does not magically make illegal things legal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Consenting to recording makes recording legal.

    Making that consent required to use the TV or its features and it being buried within lengthy, opaque terms of service in a country with a low level of literacy should be illegal, but it stands in the US because it's a consumer hostile country.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    A TOS presented after an electronic device has been sold is not valid in most of the World since it's considered an attempt to, after the sale, force a change of the terms of the implicit contract which is the sale.

    A company can shove whatever they want in front of the customer as contract conditions they have to accept for a sale before the sale - by which point the potential customer can refuse and not buy or accept and buy - not after.

    Of course, they don't do that because they would lose most sales, so instead there's a TOS or EULA which the owners of the devices are forced to agree to after the sale to fully enjoy that which they bought, but these are really just legal fictions in most countries.

    Mind you, this does not apply to a subscription to an ongoing service, though even then at least in Europe, there are conditions they much obbey to have the customer accept a TOS or a TOS change after subscribing, such as it being possible for the customer to cancel the service at no cost rather than accept the new TOS.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    "In any two-party state" what? That's such a weird thing to say. Two-party systems are a worse version of applied democracy, that should be incredibly obvious. I just seriously don't understand why you would even think about saying that it's a crime in two-party states only, it's so odd. If anything two-party states are more akin to not having strong laws against that because of the very fact of it. Look at the US, which I'm guessing is a big part of your mind in this. Do yourself a favor and search for countries two-party systems and their laws on this compared to actual democracies with more parties.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    Call recording laws in some U.S. states require only one party to be aware of the recording, while other states generally require both parties to be aware. Several states require that all parties consent when one party wants to record a telephone conversation.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 268 points 2 months ago (38 children)

    EU really should regulate against this kind of behaviour

  • source
  • hideshow 38 child comments
  • [–] 124 points 2 months ago (25 children)

    Problem us that there are too few tech literate politicians

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 2 months ago (17 children)

    It's not the politicians job to know everything but to make decisions and legislate based on information from the expertise. It is the people in the know that need to make the proposals for the politicians to bring it up. It's us, the tech literate, that need to write proposals that are informative with arguments derived from trusted sources to make the politicians aware that these are concerns that need to be addressed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago

    The fucked up part is that "expertise" is assumed to be exclusively found in the industry being regulated. Bill Gates is a respected industry expert, but RMS is just some dumbfuck nobody because he's not "in the industry".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    It is the people in the know that need to make the proposals

    No, it's the politician's job to get in touch with experts of any given field.
    They prefer lobbyists instead because they are corrupt.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    After proposals come in, yes. If the only proposals coming in are from lobbyists of various corporations and interest groups, guess which matters are going to be on the table?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    Sadly, I don't have time or money to do that. You know who does? Big tech does!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    Let's all lie belly up and do nothing and accept that nothing will ever change for the better because nobody else is doing it for us and it is impossible for us to change the world all alone. This is exactly the defeatist mindset that the economic elites want people to have.

    You could do something small, like find out your representatives and write a personal mail to them, informing them from your point of view. With enough people doing small things and some doing big things the chances for things like this gaining traction are magnitudes bigger than giving up in advance. It takes a few hours to a few days depending on your dedication and whatever cost coffee is in your area of residence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

    It's so refreshing finding someone with that kind of opinion. I feel less lonely.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    It is a politicians job to know what they are doing in fact.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Read at least the entire first sentence before you feel the need to comment, my dude.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Don't lead with garbage, how about that?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    And this, kids, is why reading comprehension is so important. Don't let media consumption rot your brain into a two second attention span that leaves you confused and angry by information beyond the rudimentary crafted to pander your reality tunnel.

    Yes, Timmy you are correct. Before algorithmic video slop, very similar effects were observed from exposure to lead, and that's why it was phased out of society. That does explain why your gramps is angrily waving his cane at anything complex for which there is no simple solution.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago

    Maybe read what you write? No reason to make yourself look so dumb (and just to state the obvious, I'm not disagreeing at all, just pointing out what should be obvious but apparently isn't).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 32 points 2 months ago* (10 children)

    EU lobbies won't ever allow it.

    In the later years the EU regulations have been massively disappointing. Only favouring big EU companies and destroying little businesses and the european consumers.

    Some disappointing eu regulations:

    • The cookiesgate. Your data is still going around everywhere. You just have a pop up everywhere that means nothing.

    • ¿Replaceable batteries on smartphones? No, only for cheap chinese phones if so. The big players can pay for some european certification on the quality of their batteries and doesn't need to be replaceable.

    • ¿Stop killing games? Hahahaha don't ever think about it.

    • You are buying too much, we need you poorer. So we put up a 3€ tariffs per category product on chinese stores so you are forced to buy the exact same product to an european retailer at twice the price.

    • We heard you like the environment, what about a new complicated tax on packaging so all small business cannot function and only big business are allowed to send products within the european union.

    I think the days of the EU legislation saving the day are far off.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Liberalism will always be corrupted by capitalism at the end of the the day. Maybe some systems last a decade or two longer, but it’s all bound to fall.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago*

    IMHO Liberalism was manufactured by Capitalism as a left-sounding form of politics to allow mainstream parties which were genuinelly leftwing to move Right in Economic, Quality Of Life and even broad Equality whislt still appearing to be left-wing due to their pro-liberty posture on Moral and Social subjects.

    I say this because I have yet to see any form of Liberalism in mainstream politics, ever, anywhere, which sought to maximize people's freedom to access limitied or constrained resources which are required merelly to live, such as Land (which Land Ownership goes against), so I don't think that at least in Politics there was ever any genuine Liberalism for Capitalism to corrupt.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago* (2 children)

    That charge is not just on Chinese stores. I manufacture my own product in the usa through a factory i own and get hit with those fucking charges.

    Then I’ve got to pay for all this cardboard and plastic but OH LOOK there’s a minimum fee so I’m subsidizing larger businesses or Europeans in general. AND I need to pay for a European contact to do it! Fuck yourselves for that one.

    Eu regulation is hostile to small business and they will be left with nothing but major shitty international corps at this rate.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago

    I mean the whole point of this is to subsidize small business in the EU at the expense of businesses outside the EU. The fact it is more difficult and costly for you is exactly the point. They want to support businesses and workers in the EU, because that’s where their people actually are, that’s where their taxes are, that’s where they support infrastructure and social programs.

    It is true that it favors larger international corporations, because they have near monopolies and csn manage all of this at a smaller relative cost. The solution of course is to make tariffs and other import duties scale with the size of the company.

    So the EU regulations are not perfect, they do hurt international small businesses while protecting in part local small businesses. They need, like everyone, to deal with the problem of international monopoly companies and restore more and more of their manufacturing and product development into more and more local small businesses.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 90 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (6 children)

    Waiting for the "No idea how this happened, we're sorry and promise to make this better in future versions" moment - instead of admitting that this is just part of their business model.

    Hoping for prosecution from the EU and at least one other country.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    I'm hoping not only prosecution, but an actual outcome such that they (and other companies) are afraid to try this again.

    If all they get is a small fine that's just a business expense to them, then of course they'll continue doing sh** like this.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -13 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    from the EU and at least one other country.

    EU is not a country.

    Current Commission is pushing for chatcontrol so they'd probably applaud LG's practices.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    The EU is not a country, yet it does stuff that otherwise countries do, like legislating and judicating privacy laws. The correct term would have been "other political entity" but what is the point of that word picking again?

    Like any political entity the EU can do many things at once, the good, the bad, and the ugly. Different institutions also have different interests. The Commission isn't the primary driver behind chat control, a number of member states are. At the same time EU courts tend to be staunchly opposed to mass surveillance and in the European Parliament it depends on the party.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 84 points 2 months ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 71 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    My LG TV runs WebOS, which is a linux distro. I have been wondering how hard it is to root and replace with a distro of my own choosing. I had thought because my TV is pretty old that I was safe from the more sophisticated spying, but last week it interrupted what I was watching and would not let me continue using it without agreeing to new terms of use. This revived my interest in rooting it.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    I saw this linked the other day. I haven’t looked into it deeply or done it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago

    I didn't know LG webOS rooting was a thing, that's interesting to know.

    There is an open source version of webOS, although I don't know how it compares to the stock LG version. Maybe there will eventually be something like a LineageOS equivalent.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 24 points 2 months ago

    https://cani.rootmy.tv/ - I just recently bought an LG for the first time, with eyes wide open, and used this site to get root on it, as well as VLANing it with a strict block list, but also an allow list only based policy, and strict no external DNS requests policies.

    Also worth knowing that when accepting their policies many of them are optional and are just data slurping consent , think it was the top 2 compulsory in my region out of about 5.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 56 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    I ran a packet capture on my TV as I left it turned off overnight.

    They wake up in the middle of the night, do "stuff" then go back offline. Like a zombie.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    I have basically every URL our TV automatically pings blocked at this point. It phones home every 10-30 seconds whether they're off or on. I think when we get a new TV we're looking for a dumb TV

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    we’re looking for a dumb TV

    Increasingly hard to find, monitors are going the same way as well as projectors.
    Soon enough you'll need soldering skills.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    LG's monitors were downloading malware/ad BS so you can't trust the monitors either.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    47 comments in c/privacy@lemmy.dbzer0.com view that post
    25 comments in c/pcmasterrace@lemmy.world view that post
    24 comments in c/television@piefed.social view that post
    17 comments in c/privacy@lemmy.ml view that post
    8 comments in c/privacy@lemmy.ca view that post
    2 comments in c/tecnologia@lemmy.eco.br view that post