Silicon Valley Is Listening to Your Most Intimate Moments(bloombergquint.com)
bloombergquint.com
Silicon Valley Is Listening to Your Most Intimate Moments
https://www.bloombergquint.com/bq-blue-exclusive/silicon-valley-got-millions-to-let-siri-and-alexa-listen-in
95 comments
You can also just disable javascript for the website.
Unfortunately, the popular graphical browsers AFAIK do not allow the user to disable CSS. Other news sites that use AMP, such as WSJ, use CSS as well as Javascript to annoy the user. Disabling Javascript is not enough. It is possible to remove the offensive CSS from a page through the browser's developer console, developer tools, etc. but at that point we may as well use a browser extension.
Here is a filter for WSJ.
Here is a filter for WSJ.
sed -n '/<article/,/<\/article/{/./{/<h1/,/<\/h1>/p;};/<title>/,/<\/title>/p;/./{/<p>[^<]*/,/<\/p>/p;};}' a.htmThis is what you get if you block javascript for www.bloombergquint.com:
https://i.imgur.com/LrPYVmq.png
Thank you !!!
Nice hack.
Nice hack.
I guess having done AI and security for 20 years means none of this fazes me.
Of course they record what you say, and of course a human is listening to it. How else would they train their models?
I also believe Amazon when they say that it isn't recording unless the blue light is on, and that only comes on when it thinks you said "Alexa".
I mute the device when I'm having a private conversation. If it activates otherwise, I'm pretty aware of that.
I guess it just doesn't really bother me. I have a pretty good idea of what it's recording.
Of course they record what you say, and of course a human is listening to it. How else would they train their models?
I also believe Amazon when they say that it isn't recording unless the blue light is on, and that only comes on when it thinks you said "Alexa".
I mute the device when I'm having a private conversation. If it activates otherwise, I'm pretty aware of that.
I guess it just doesn't really bother me. I have a pretty good idea of what it's recording.
> I have a pretty good idea of what it's recording.
Like an 8 year old girl?[0]
Yeah, it's a Ring doorbell camera thingy, but Ring has been an Amazon product for just shy of two years now. Sure we can blame the mother for setting it up 'wrong', or for using an old password, or some other very common problem that <99% of all user will have. But creeps have shown that it's not just straightforward, but easy, to get into these devices.
It's better to just not have them in the first place.
[0] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/man-hacks-ring-camera-8...
Like an 8 year old girl?[0]
Yeah, it's a Ring doorbell camera thingy, but Ring has been an Amazon product for just shy of two years now. Sure we can blame the mother for setting it up 'wrong', or for using an old password, or some other very common problem that <99% of all user will have. But creeps have shown that it's not just straightforward, but easy, to get into these devices.
It's better to just not have them in the first place.
[0] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/man-hacks-ring-camera-8...
> I guess having done AI and security for 20 years means none of this fazes me.
Unfortunately I'd have to guess that many of the people not doing AI and security for 20 years would be considerably more surprised.
Unfortunately I'd have to guess that many of the people not doing AI and security for 20 years would be considerably more surprised.
Do you also have a good idea of what is recorded when you're at someone else place? Do you ask them to mute their devices?
Do you ask people to turn off their smartphones when you’re at their house? Or at dinner? Or in public?
That is a practice adopted by some, yes.
Are you speculating here, or is this something you’ve observed?
I'd assume everything between "Alexa" and the response.
The headline (I blame Bloomberg on this) would be much less clickbaity as "Silicon Valley Records Your Digital Assistant Requests."
Remember when you could buy bluetooth speakers that you could listen to without the speaker listening to you ?
Nowadays everyone of my friends has a alexa or google speakers which sound shitty compared to real speakers and they spy on our conversations. For what ? to turn the fucking lights on or play a tune on demand? those lazy dumbasses cant be bothered to get off their butt to turn the lights on ? If only I had privacy conscious friends.
Nowadays everyone of my friends has a alexa or google speakers which sound shitty compared to real speakers and they spy on our conversations. For what ? to turn the fucking lights on or play a tune on demand? those lazy dumbasses cant be bothered to get off their butt to turn the lights on ? If only I had privacy conscious friends.
So much of the current "home automation" products appear to me to be more parlour tricks than actual automation. Having to ask for something to happen is such a high technological cost for such a tiny change in convenience in the age of already being able to remote control a bunch of stuff with your phone.
There are actual proper home automation products out there, and some of them can interface via these privacy invading microphones masquerading as speakers, but the microphones themselves aren't "home automation" by any useful definition, they're just another alternative remote control.
I wonder if they use the term "smart speaker" because "microphone" just brings up thoughts of Banksy artwork?
There are actual proper home automation products out there, and some of them can interface via these privacy invading microphones masquerading as speakers, but the microphones themselves aren't "home automation" by any useful definition, they're just another alternative remote control.
I wonder if they use the term "smart speaker" because "microphone" just brings up thoughts of Banksy artwork?
The real rub is there's hardly any incentive to make things play nice with eachother for a while. You buy a garage door opener, it works for 30 years. You get one that can interface with your smart speaker, and both are unsupported in a few years.
You end up paying far more, way more often, for something vaguely more convenient than the old method. A clap light.
On the flip side, with the expansion of IoT comes creativity for people willing to tinker. We are pretty lucky to have resources like github, raspberry pi, self hosted services, just options from the mainstream consumer ad spam crap if you are willing to stick your head under the hood.
You end up paying far more, way more often, for something vaguely more convenient than the old method. A clap light.
On the flip side, with the expansion of IoT comes creativity for people willing to tinker. We are pretty lucky to have resources like github, raspberry pi, self hosted services, just options from the mainstream consumer ad spam crap if you are willing to stick your head under the hood.
If you think about it, it is clear that Amazon and Google put a lot more R&D into the microphones than the speakers in these things. Yet they insist on calling them smart speakers, not smart microphones.
It would be like if you took a device with a camera and called it a portal or something.
It would be like if you took a device with a camera and called it a portal or something.
My dad has his whole house wired up with echo dots in every room, voice-activated lights, voice-control TV, and those shitty $100 security cameras in every room.
I've tried to explain why he doesn't need them. His response (about the security cameras) is always, "If there's ever a break in, I'll be glad I have them." The fact that actually using a light switch sets in motion a 20-minute repair via iPad doesn't seem to bother him. He doesn't view the wiretaps as a problem. He (with my mother's help) recently bought a wifi-enabled fridge and kitchen sink.
I love my parents to death, but it's ridiculous. I'm to the point where I usually leave my phone in the next room over when I'm not using it (and please check me in at a psych ward if I ever buy a smart-watch with a cellular connection and an omni-directional microphone). Its beneficial for clarity of thought / lack of distraction as well as for privacy.
Connectivity for connectivity's sake will be the death of freedom.
I've tried to explain why he doesn't need them. His response (about the security cameras) is always, "If there's ever a break in, I'll be glad I have them." The fact that actually using a light switch sets in motion a 20-minute repair via iPad doesn't seem to bother him. He doesn't view the wiretaps as a problem. He (with my mother's help) recently bought a wifi-enabled fridge and kitchen sink.
I love my parents to death, but it's ridiculous. I'm to the point where I usually leave my phone in the next room over when I'm not using it (and please check me in at a psych ward if I ever buy a smart-watch with a cellular connection and an omni-directional microphone). Its beneficial for clarity of thought / lack of distraction as well as for privacy.
Connectivity for connectivity's sake will be the death of freedom.
It's funny...we've had this conversation with my mother repeatedly but she doesn't see a way technology companies could 'do anything bad with her asking for directions'
My siblings and I have drawn a line at DNA testing. She keeps talking about submitting her DNA to some mail order testing company and it has been made clear that would be the end of our relationship. We will try and help her protect her own privacy but have zero tolerance for her disrespecting ours.
My siblings and I have drawn a line at DNA testing. She keeps talking about submitting her DNA to some mail order testing company and it has been made clear that would be the end of our relationship. We will try and help her protect her own privacy but have zero tolerance for her disrespecting ours.
> My siblings and I have drawn a line at DNA testing. She keeps talking about submitting her DNA to some mail order testing company and it has been made clear that would be the end of our relationship. We will try and help her protect her own privacy but have zero tolerance for her disrespecting ours.
It's sad that people don't recognize how DNA collected like that (whether by 23AndMe, Ancestry.com/Quest Diagnostics, or anyone else) is used. Almost 100% of the time, it goes into a database that's readily available for searches by law enforcement, without warrant. They can use the DNA of a close relative to figure out what they want to find in a suspect. It WILL be misused, and it is not in our best interest.
Nor is the surveillance net made by Blink and Ring cameras, and the pervasive network of microphones made by phones, smart-watches, smart TV's, smart faucets and fridges, smart ovens (seriously?), et cetera, ad nauseaum.
It's not only blind trust in the manufacturers of these devices to not misuse the data they collect, but it's blind trust that all of these devices will be properly secured and prevent would-be attackers from listening in to you no matter where you are. People cover up their webcams because they're afraid of hackers, but they put security cameras in their bedrooms, "to catch a thief", without a second thought.
It's sad that people don't recognize how DNA collected like that (whether by 23AndMe, Ancestry.com/Quest Diagnostics, or anyone else) is used. Almost 100% of the time, it goes into a database that's readily available for searches by law enforcement, without warrant. They can use the DNA of a close relative to figure out what they want to find in a suspect. It WILL be misused, and it is not in our best interest.
Nor is the surveillance net made by Blink and Ring cameras, and the pervasive network of microphones made by phones, smart-watches, smart TV's, smart faucets and fridges, smart ovens (seriously?), et cetera, ad nauseaum.
It's not only blind trust in the manufacturers of these devices to not misuse the data they collect, but it's blind trust that all of these devices will be properly secured and prevent would-be attackers from listening in to you no matter where you are. People cover up their webcams because they're afraid of hackers, but they put security cameras in their bedrooms, "to catch a thief", without a second thought.
You committing a lot of crimes these days, killer? I could care less about "misuse" for criminal reasons. The US military already has my prints and blood as part of MEPS intake and Tricare.
I'm more worried that DNA companies are going to use my DNA to raise my insurance rates, raise them for all of my family, or use them to predict models that fuck over other people.
I also expect them to NOT release any useful data and to hoard that as long as possible.
I'm more worried that DNA companies are going to use my DNA to raise my insurance rates, raise them for all of my family, or use them to predict models that fuck over other people.
I also expect them to NOT release any useful data and to hoard that as long as possible.
How is uncovering serial killers not in your interest>
My sister in law recently told me that she wanted to submit the DNA of her very young baby for logging in someway.
She went further, that everybody should be under observation via CCTV and other methods 24/7 “as I have nothing to hide”. It was a bit of a spit the tea out moment.
All I could do was weakly say something about “in a police state everyone is guilty of something”.
I think this is related to her near total devotion to reality TV. She almost only watch reality TV and seems to be primarily concerned with judging the behaviour of those involved.
I think, sadly, she’s far closer to the mainstream than I’ll ever be. She regards my demands of privacy from tech companies as “weird” :(
She went further, that everybody should be under observation via CCTV and other methods 24/7 “as I have nothing to hide”. It was a bit of a spit the tea out moment.
All I could do was weakly say something about “in a police state everyone is guilty of something”.
I think this is related to her near total devotion to reality TV. She almost only watch reality TV and seems to be primarily concerned with judging the behaviour of those involved.
I think, sadly, she’s far closer to the mainstream than I’ll ever be. She regards my demands of privacy from tech companies as “weird” :(
And at this point I think my long departed grandmother who would read to me in bed whatever she was reading. she liked to read about history. Which left me at a tender age with the reflexive understanding that those in power are usually utter bastards.
You sister in law doesn't realize the the people who would watch over her and her family's every move aren't considered ruthless criminals only by simple convention.
You sister in law doesn't realize the the people who would watch over her and her family's every move aren't considered ruthless criminals only by simple convention.
Yeah scary how naive some people are. Sadly I'm not a good enough communicator to convincer her of this.
I've been rolling this around for a long time. We tend to think of leaders as being good (ours of course) or bad (theirs of course). But I think mostly our leaders are as good or bad as we let them get away with.
What's the fear? You leave DNA everywhere as it is. These companies just genotype you for a variety of variants. Chances are you were genotyped at birth if you aren't so old. This data is legally protected.
My dad didn't even talk about doing it before hand. You're lucky to have got the warning.
Feels gross knowing that my DNA is largely known by so many organisations.
Feels gross knowing that my DNA is largely known by so many organisations.
Your DNA is 99.9% known anyway, because you’re a human. Only the remaining 0.1% varies between individuals.
Yeah and its that 0.1% that can be used to identify me, so that's what I care about being in a database.
I don't care if they run a DNA search on a database that has such broad results that it includes bananas...
I don't care if they run a DNA search on a database that has such broad results that it includes bananas...
If you are a millenial you've probably been genotyped at birth already. This data has some pretty good legal protections around it, there's really no reason to worry.
Under what circumstances, apart from where you or a close relative has committed a crime, are you concerned that someone might identify you from your DNA?
I can easily imagine health insurance companies refusing coverage or charging exorbitant rates to people because they know about your DNA and what diseases you might be susceptible to...
That's illegal...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_Information_Nondiscrim...
And if it wasn't illegal then insurance companies would simply just demand DNA before underwriting your policy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_Information_Nondiscrim...
And if it wasn't illegal then insurance companies would simply just demand DNA before underwriting your policy.
"Why would you want that? Apart from the very clear and obvious reasons that is."
Why do I always see this sort of question phrasing on this site in particular?
Why do I always see this sort of question phrasing on this site in particular?
The very clear and obvious reason being to protect yourself from criminal punishment? Yikes.
Do you derive your sense of morality from what's legal/illegal or something? Of course one should want to protect themselves from criminal punishment.
Or would be physically present sometime around the time of a crime... or if the FBI wanted to frame someone they thought of as a subversive....
What does a WiFi kitchen sink do?
It's as useless as it sounds.
This isn't the one they have, but it's similar:
https://www.amazon.com/Trinsic-Pull-Down-Activated-Technolog...
This isn't the one they have, but it's similar:
https://www.amazon.com/Trinsic-Pull-Down-Activated-Technolog...
Does it still work as a tap if the WiFi is down? :D
You won't know because you'll be locked a room somewhere it pitch dark.
I know a number of germophobes who would want something like this to avoid touching the knob/lever while preparing meals etc.
An infra-red sensor, as implemented in many public toilets, seems like a less error-prone solution to that problem.
Or a pedal.
Or a pedal.
Leak.
The same could be said for everything. "Those lazy dumbasses can't be bothered to order a pizza over the phone?", "those lazy dumbasses can't hail a cab themselves?". No need to insult people for making something easier for themselves. It might be turning off the lights for some, but mine saves me a trip down to and through my basement to open my garage door, which is more convenience than 99% of the crap SV is pushing out.
Well, there's one difference. You're not getting inferior pizza by ordering online. The vast majority of Bluetooth speakers are marketed for convenience to people who don't understand the difference in sound quality that you get from full sized speakers. And this isn't some audiophile voodoo snobbery - it's physics, you simply can't get both good volume and good reproduction without size.
That may be true, but mine were half the price of a similar sized speaker and has good enough quality for my kitchen, plus all of the other things I use it for.
For simple ambient noise it does just fine. If I want better I have a Klipsch home theater system.
But I don't generally listen to a ton of music regardless so its not the primary reason I purchased either of them. If thats the reason someone picked up a smart speaker, then sure, they aren't getting the best for their dollar.
For simple ambient noise it does just fine. If I want better I have a Klipsch home theater system.
But I don't generally listen to a ton of music regardless so its not the primary reason I purchased either of them. If thats the reason someone picked up a smart speaker, then sure, they aren't getting the best for their dollar.
But my echo can make music play on my home stereo.
> "Those lazy dumbasses can't be bothered to order a pizza over the phone?"
To be fair, I'm happy to order a pizza online, and I'd be (a little less) happy to order a pizza through a phone tree, but I don't want to order a pizza over the phone because I don't want to talk to the person on the other end. The amount of work involved in placing the order doesn't really come into it.
I would also note, though, that pizza orders given to a person over the phone are frequently messed up, while orders placed online come out correctly.
To be fair, I'm happy to order a pizza online, and I'd be (a little less) happy to order a pizza through a phone tree, but I don't want to order a pizza over the phone because I don't want to talk to the person on the other end. The amount of work involved in placing the order doesn't really come into it.
I would also note, though, that pizza orders given to a person over the phone are frequently messed up, while orders placed online come out correctly.
Keep in mind, some people literally can't get off their butts to turn the lights on.
And if you have lost your sight, being able to play a tune on demand via an Echo voice command is a miracle. So is being able to listen to a podcast or audio book. Or being able to ask how old Tom Brady is, how many tablespoons in a quarter cup, what's the weather next week and how far it is between Dallas and Austin.
And if you have lost your sight, being able to play a tune on demand via an Echo voice command is a miracle. So is being able to listen to a podcast or audio book. Or being able to ask how old Tom Brady is, how many tablespoons in a quarter cup, what's the weather next week and how far it is between Dallas and Austin.
Edge cases which almost definitely don't apply to the people they are talking about.
True.
But also edge cases for which mass-market development would likely be infeasible.
The reality of market-capitalist R&D orientation is that if you want to support legitimate-need edge cases, at reasonable per-unit cost, a mass-market deployment is all but inevitable.
A reality I'm less than gruntled with.
But also edge cases for which mass-market development would likely be infeasible.
The reality of market-capitalist R&D orientation is that if you want to support legitimate-need edge cases, at reasonable per-unit cost, a mass-market deployment is all but inevitable.
A reality I'm less than gruntled with.
It's surprising how much convenience and novelty trumps everything else.
(I mean this rhetorically, not as an actual insult...)
You're a lazy dumbass who types on a smartphone who can't be bothered to etch it into rock instead.
You're a lazy dumbass who types on a smartphone who can't be bothered to etch it into rock instead.
Serious question. Why is Alexa on an Echo different than Siri on a phone? Seems like there is clear outrage about “surveillance economy listening devices” (from some members of this community) when they’re in your kitchen but not your pocket? Why is that different?
It's not that different. Especially for third parties, who don't control the device.
When in others' homes, I typically ask whether there are listening devices. And if so, I request that they be disconnected. And if the host declines, I may leave -- or at least say nothing consequential.
My wife's phone is on 24/7 and almost always within easy reach. So I never say anything consequential, unless it's been moved to the utility closet. Lots of fan noise there.
Edit: From https://blog.cyberwar.nl/2016/02/some-elements-of-intelligen...
> 17. The greatest material curse to the profession, despite all its advantages, is undoubtedly the telephone. It is a constant source of temptation to slackness. And even if you do not use it carelessly yourself, the other fellow, very often will, so in any case, warn him. Always act on the principle that every conversation is listened to, that a call may always give the enemy a line. Naturally, always unplug during confidential conversations. Even better is it to have no phone in your room, or else have it in a box or cupboard.
When in others' homes, I typically ask whether there are listening devices. And if so, I request that they be disconnected. And if the host declines, I may leave -- or at least say nothing consequential.
My wife's phone is on 24/7 and almost always within easy reach. So I never say anything consequential, unless it's been moved to the utility closet. Lots of fan noise there.
Edit: From https://blog.cyberwar.nl/2016/02/some-elements-of-intelligen...
> 17. The greatest material curse to the profession, despite all its advantages, is undoubtedly the telephone. It is a constant source of temptation to slackness. And even if you do not use it carelessly yourself, the other fellow, very often will, so in any case, warn him. Always act on the principle that every conversation is listened to, that a call may always give the enemy a line. Naturally, always unplug during confidential conversations. Even better is it to have no phone in your room, or else have it in a box or cupboard.
See, although I can't really identify with your attitude, I can respect it because you seems to _really_ care about it and are thorough about it.
What I really cannot stand are the people that will complain about an Alexa being in the room, while at the same time posting three Instagram stories a day, having their phone assistant listening constantly, maybe played around with tik tok ... at that point, you really don't care about privacy, you're just cherry picking. I think a large part of it stems from the fact that a "always listening smart speaker" is something where even the most technologically inept can add two and two together and figure out how it could be "used against you" so to speak. That their phone could technically be doing the same thing, and that throwing massive amounts of personal data at Facebook willingly could lead to similar privacy concerns, doesn't even cross their minds.
What I really cannot stand are the people that will complain about an Alexa being in the room, while at the same time posting three Instagram stories a day, having their phone assistant listening constantly, maybe played around with tik tok ... at that point, you really don't care about privacy, you're just cherry picking. I think a large part of it stems from the fact that a "always listening smart speaker" is something where even the most technologically inept can add two and two together and figure out how it could be "used against you" so to speak. That their phone could technically be doing the same thing, and that throwing massive amounts of personal data at Facebook willingly could lead to similar privacy concerns, doesn't even cross their minds.
Hey :)
Many experiences drive my attitude.
Back in the 60s-70s, I was a casual LSD dealer. So I learned the importance of discretion.
And in my last career, I analyzed various sorts of data discovery for plaintiffs' firms and attorneys general. Everything from email and spreadsheets to enterprise "mainframe" datasets. So I learned the methodology of discovery. Piecing together bits of evidence, following leads, identifying people to depose, and so on.
But yeah, I'm thorough about it.
It's also a hobby. And something of a demonstration, and the occasional consulting gig.
Many experiences drive my attitude.
Back in the 60s-70s, I was a casual LSD dealer. So I learned the importance of discretion.
And in my last career, I analyzed various sorts of data discovery for plaintiffs' firms and attorneys general. Everything from email and spreadsheets to enterprise "mainframe" datasets. So I learned the methodology of discovery. Piecing together bits of evidence, following leads, identifying people to depose, and so on.
But yeah, I'm thorough about it.
It's also a hobby. And something of a demonstration, and the occasional consulting gig.
It’s not. Some of us disable Siri on our phones too.
If I disconnect Siri from the internet she’s still “smart”. Alexa isn’t.
Amazon vs. Apple
Siri gets to go on field trips.
"I have nothing to hide wizo geeko, here take this middle finger" is the answer we get when we try to inform people about privacy. Even large scale privacy breaches of sensitive information have had no impact on people's privacy awareness.
Whenever they say that, ask them how much money they made last year. When they say "no" ask, "why, do you have anything to hide?".
For those old enough to have heard stories about party line telephone usage, this appears to be the modern version.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_line_(telephony)
As someone mentioned, the money is in localizing many of the cloud services.. Or the modern version of shrink-wrap software, which removes the whole "you're the product" profit motive.
For the casual observer, the ongoing drama of merging your wallet, personal diary, communications, plus other activities and oozing metadata 24/7 is just too tempting for strangers. All of that money for nothing is high stakes nowadays. Caveat emptor...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_line_(telephony)
As someone mentioned, the money is in localizing many of the cloud services.. Or the modern version of shrink-wrap software, which removes the whole "you're the product" profit motive.
For the casual observer, the ongoing drama of merging your wallet, personal diary, communications, plus other activities and oozing metadata 24/7 is just too tempting for strangers. All of that money for nothing is high stakes nowadays. Caveat emptor...
Interesting that in a marketplace where seemingly all home speakers on offer have voice assist, Sonos' newest small speaker, the Sonos One SL, is described as "Microphone-free".
I chuckle at a 'reassurance' like that one. Mechanically, a speaker is a poorly optimized microphone and a microphone is a poorly optimized speaker.[1]
I don't doubt there are people working for most major governments' intelligence departments who can use malicious software to facilitate listening through a computer connected speaker when surveilling a target (even if that speaker doesn't have an integrated microphone, in a very literal sense it is a microphone).
[1] https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/154343/can-a-sp...
Edit: precision of language
I don't doubt there are people working for most major governments' intelligence departments who can use malicious software to facilitate listening through a computer connected speaker when surveilling a target (even if that speaker doesn't have an integrated microphone, in a very literal sense it is a microphone).
[1] https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/154343/can-a-sp...
Edit: precision of language
Let alone back in the day landline phones were used as wiretapping devices, even when you are not speaking on the phone and it's on hook. The telephony standard was designed with this in mind, i.e. the possibility to turn any phone on-hook or off-hook to a listening device.
This is paranoid nonsense. Sure a speaker can be used as a very bad microphone. But only if you plug it into a microphone input! Are government agents going to break into your house and rewire your smart speaker? Of course not.
The words I wrote were computer connected speaker. So, yes, plugged-into-a-computer is what I was talking about. Thanks for the further reassurance that government agents won't break into my home, but that wasn't what I was suggesting. It's a non sequitur and a straw man.
Government agenties are more likely to, for example, expand on publicly available research that uses malicious software and audio I/O built into (or connected to) computers to remotely access air gapped computers.[1] And, if it's possible to write a network protocol that runs over low quality mics and speakers up to 65ft apart, it doesn't sound unreasonable to similarly hack up audio drivers such that a speaker can function as a microphone for the purposes of espionage, without anyone breaking down your door or rewiring anything. Spies don't have to convince a jury with the intelligence/evidence they gather, so low quality can often be good enough.
Of course, an attempt to aggregate the compromising of countless bespoke proprietary audio drivers and operating system versions doesn't scale at all... Which is why I used the wording when surveilling a target and not when surveilling speakers everywhere. That latter claim would indeed be paranoid nonsense. Which is why I didn't make it.
As in, a government is surveilling a particular person or building, has compromised this a nearby computer remotely, but the computer has no microphone. If there's a connected speaker (or even an integrated speaker on the motherboard), deliver a payload that messes with the audio drivers to see what you can hear using the speaker.
[1] http://www.jocm.us/uploadfile/2013/1125/20131125103803901.pd...
Government agenties are more likely to, for example, expand on publicly available research that uses malicious software and audio I/O built into (or connected to) computers to remotely access air gapped computers.[1] And, if it's possible to write a network protocol that runs over low quality mics and speakers up to 65ft apart, it doesn't sound unreasonable to similarly hack up audio drivers such that a speaker can function as a microphone for the purposes of espionage, without anyone breaking down your door or rewiring anything. Spies don't have to convince a jury with the intelligence/evidence they gather, so low quality can often be good enough.
Of course, an attempt to aggregate the compromising of countless bespoke proprietary audio drivers and operating system versions doesn't scale at all... Which is why I used the wording when surveilling a target and not when surveilling speakers everywhere. That latter claim would indeed be paranoid nonsense. Which is why I didn't make it.
As in, a government is surveilling a particular person or building, has compromised this a nearby computer remotely, but the computer has no microphone. If there's a connected speaker (or even an integrated speaker on the motherboard), deliver a payload that messes with the audio drivers to see what you can hear using the speaker.
[1] http://www.jocm.us/uploadfile/2013/1125/20131125103803901.pd...
Not mine. For those stupid or simply indifferent enough to have one of these spying, revolting, idiotically vapid machines in their home and always on, possibly. Better to not even keep a cell phone nearby for really private moments and conversations.
Can I get a pastebin link?
I believe this is the same article, non-paywalled: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-12-11/silicon-v...
I just sold my google home mini for $10...never trusting these devices inside my home anymore
What changed? As in, what made you think they were okay and then realize they were not?
Like, did parent think "well, google has a great reputation at avoiding data mining, so let's go with them!"
If we are to get technical, Silicon Valley is not listening to your secret, workers in the rest of the country are.
And those workers don't know you.
It's unfortunate that this almarmist technophobic slant is considered worthy journalism.
If they did the voice recognition locally, there wouldn't be a privacy issue. And that would arguably be far cooler technology.
Exactly. Cloud-powered voice assistants are thoroughly uninteresting and a huge privacy concern. Local, 100% in-device processing should be the future and if that were the case this link would indeed be "alarmist"
If the community did not value this viewpoint, you would not see it on the front page. Perhaps your disdain is misdirected.
HA! Jokes on them! I don’t have any! Wait...
Replace "firefox" with any browser that can process basic HTML. No Javascript or CSS needed.