Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by saluki | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

saluki

of course I do, it's alluded to in my comment: "(beyond what smartphones are already capable of)"

I agree, smart phones provide the same surveillance capabilities of 'smart' speakers and more.

But supposedly phones aren't always on and listening to all your audio like the 'smart' speakers.

This might just be a divide in society, some people accept surveillance as not an issue and are fine with it.

Would you place a similar 'smart' speaker device in your home if the government suddenly required it?

I just feel a surveillance state is detrimental to freedom and democracy, the freedom we have in the states is not common.

If you look back in history and even around the world today it's pretty rare. I just want to make sure we aren't setting ourselves up to weaken it or even lose it.

View on HN

> But supposedly phones aren't always on and listening to all your audio like the 'smart' speakers.

New phones are.

Also, AFAIK, Alexa et al. are only sending traffic home after the wake word is heard. I believe this has been confirmed via wireshark.

> New phones are.

But it's a setting. I own an iPhone have turned off "Hey Siri". If it would still listen all the time that would be a security issue and breach of trust.

That's true a phone has 'smart' speaker features.

It seems 'smart' speakers wake more easily than Siri.

We hadn't been hearing news stories about FANG employees listening to/reviewing conversations intimate moments until the 'smart' speakers were deployed.

I expect this could have been going on with Siri as well though.

I'm open to using a 'smart' speaker in the future, there might not be any reason for concern.

Currently it just seems like a bad idea to add recording devices you don't control around your home.

> We hadn't been hearing news stories about FANG employees listening to/reviewing conversations intimate moments until the 'smart' speakers were deployed.

That just shows that the media didn't think those stories would sell.

> New phones are.

Not new Android phones. Since Android 8, google no longer listens while the phone is locked. If you want to use the google assistant, you have to give your fingerprint or password first.

after the wake word is heard

It's more accurate to say "after the wake word is heard or after a false positive for the wake word is heard".

Even in the presence of hardware interlocks (active when the wake word has not been detected), the accuracy of wake word detection is a really important question, as is the question of whether an adversary can modify the wake word detection code remotely.

They use the exact same hotword detection - that is all they are "always listening" for (obviously plenty of false positives that can still capture other conversations)

But saying "beyond what smartphones are already capable of" diminishes the fact that they are also always listening, and are also generally near where you are. Siri, by default, is always listening. Most people don't understand or know this. People are then amazed when they put their phone on a table and say "Hey Siri" from across the room.

It's very different. Smart speakers are much better at invading privacy.

No one has yet to provide an argument as to why "smart speakers are much better at invading privacy".

For example, just this year my always-on, always-near-me iPhone was subject to an attack where anyone could call me on FaceTime and gain access to my microphone. This attack vector does not exist on my Google Home.

So, why are smart speakers much better at invading privacy?

Smart speakers are designed to listen, obviously!

Streaming audio is not seen as suspicious.

Also they aren not phones and not using wifi, not LTE/4G uplinks, making it more easy to stream audio without hitting bandwidth caps or using too much battery.

It's way much easier to notice if a phone streams audio often and unnecessarily.

Smart speakers are made to listen by design, that's their sole purpose: to listen and respond to that. Disabling the microphone takes away the core functionality and basically their purpose for being. You're left with a speaker.

For a phone the assistant is an optional side-feature and disabling it takes almost nothing away from the utility of the smartphone. You're still left with a smartphone.

If you believe that your smartphone isn't always on, wouldn't it make sense that your smart speaker is also off until you give it a wake word?

No, because it's a small step from having a smart speaker - which is specifically designed to pick up someone speaking quietly from the other side of the room - to go from "requiring a wake work" to "listening to every conversation". Especially when the companies involved (Google and Amazon specifically) have direct interests in knowing what you are talking about.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com