Hacker News Reader

Comment by raffraffraff | Hacker News Reader

Honestly, I find it amazing that so many people let these things into their homes. The price you pay for such little actual utility isn't worth it. I won't use voice recognition on a single device. Not only do I not trust Google/Amazon, I don't trust that I wouldn't accidentally say something that triggers it to phone a person I'm talking about, or order something expensive in the internet. Home Assistant on my phone and lots of physical zigbee controllers works just fine for me. I don't want to talk to my devices.

I have an in-law who uses voice recognition to dictate messages into WhatsApp extended family group and some of the shit she's posted is hilariously (unintentionally) spicy. Her kids get into stupid "conversations" with Alexa. They're 8. Just no.

View on HN

> I don't trust that I wouldn't accidentally say something that triggers it to phone a person I'm talking about

Someone set their name on Xbox live to something like "XBox turn off" then got people to read his name, which would turn off their console. It's a harmless example, but it shows that people and devices are susceptible to this kind of attack.

Just like in the '90s we (silly script kiddies) put press "Alt-F4 to continue" on our websites.

Does anyone's employer have rules about having company meetings (at home) with such devices nearby? Seems potentially risky.

Yes. Had them since WHF first started. We have different rules depending on the level of the meeting though.

40-50% of the meetings are low risk and they don't require removal or power off and these devices though.

For medium risk or higher we run random tests during meetings to see if they have google and alexa around. Nothing fancy or anyting. We just have they devices play a song like "Never Gonna Give You Up".

Yes - in fact some firms are recommending they be disabled altogether near work areas, including at home.

We configured endpoint detection tools (ie Very Popular Endpoint Product) to scan local networks for these devices based on open ports and mac addresses. It is fairly straightforward to fingerprint them. Not foolproof (wifi isolation and other network segmentation), but low hanging fruit.

Most people believe that they have nothing to hide. To them, there is no cost in lost privacy because they do not value privacy.

The sad part is, for most people who say this, it's true. Their lives indeed contain nothing interesting enough to be worth concealing.

When I'm feeling spicy, my response to that line of thinking is to ask that person for their house keys so I can come by sometime and look around. Or I'll ask them to unlock their phone so I can rummage around in their messages and photos.

I know a fair number of people who would not object.

The majority of people on Earth have pretty boring lives.

Then I hold out my hand expectedly awaiting their house keys and phone.

Saddest thought of the day.

> The price you pay for such little actual utility isn't worth it.

It is for us. The use case that sold us is my partner cooks a lot and often needs to add reminders or update a shopping list, which is difficult with both hands dripping with raw chicken juice or dough or whatever. They were for sale a while ago for $30 a device and they are decent speakers to boot, better even than a $1k phone.

My wife and I cook every day, and at the moment we're both using Nutracheck (so we're scanning barcodes and entering weights a lot as we cook). While I occasionally have to wipe my hands on a paper towel, I don't find myself incapacitated by sauce much of the time.

I’m not worried about my Google Home devices

They’d have to work reliably first

Reply on news.ycombinator.com