Hacker News Reader

Comment by j45 | Hacker News Reader

Regardless of it being how it always was done, such a finger print can easily be injected into LG's advertising ecosystem to infer everything about your demographic and what your interests and income might be and hit you with more specialized ads.

What we watch is not OK to be fed ads, especially if I wasn't using their service to being with and its monitoring the audio from any input to do this.

In this way, smart tvs and smart home devices are effectively hostile devices behind your router at home.

View on HN

Yes. It’s also horrible that they have microphones in your home listening to your conversations. LG knowing what I’m watching is awful, but it seems even worse for LG to listen in to the conversation I have with my loved ones about it after. I don’t want to be under surveillance in my own home.

Both are unacceptably egregious and done for zero benefit of the customer and a disproportionate and asymmetric benefit for the manufacturer.

I've been trying to learn how to secure LG TVs, and saw that some people do seem to jailbreak them withan open version of webOS.

> I've been trying to learn how to secure LG TVs

It’d be wonderful if we had a grapheneos equivalent for tvs. They’re very capable Android devices. Such a pity “we don’t own the glass”.

The good news is there is no good reason to plug the TV into the internet.

To watch movies from a streaming service?

Always, and only use an external device for streaming services, never the software built into the TV.

Apple TV, Android TV or other devices are perfectly capable and better integrate with mobile and other devices in your network.

The tradeoff consumers are sold is trading convenience of in device apps for security.

Smart home devices like TVs, and thermostats should be treated as default hostile and isolated on a guest wireless network instead of your main one.

Use Apple TV for that.

If you want true, verifiable privacy and control, it's not an Apple TV that you need. Any old laptop or desktop computer can be used to stream content from the Internet using a Web browser or other "apps."

E.g. Netflix doesn't let you to stream 4k video in browser afaik. So no, it's not a good option.

Desktop OS also don't support Dolby Vision or fancy spatial audio formats.

Trifecta: Piracy + Local media server + Streaming device, either Apple TV/Android TV (without internet access).

No loss of quality, devices that could spy on you, don't, and those that would spy on you, can't. The only trade-off is some convenience.

It does let you do that, but only on platforms where they can enforce HDCP. So e.g. Edge on Windows or Safari on macOS work fine, and I think Chrome recently joined the list too. But not on Linux.

I.e. spend more money to do things the TV can perfectly well do. We should make the spying illegal so we can use the devices we buy to their full potential without being sold to advertisers. "Give money to this other company that may or may not also be collecting data and may also sell you out in the future" is a suboptimal solution.

I don't think we can do anything substantial. So I'm going to just use this "suboptimal" solution.

No, we should decouple the display hardware from the playback device. Spying or not, the playback part will be obsolete long before the display part.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com