4 ms·

With a smart TV there's at least the option to just switch to an external device and ignore the entire smart part of the TV. You're not really in a worse place

With a smart TV there's at least the option to just switch to an external device and ignore the entire smart part of the TV. You're not really in a worse place than if you had bought a non-smart TV (unless the smart TV software actually breaks in some way that interferes with regular operations, which isn't entirely unrealistic). But in many other cases of smart devices where the core function relies on external services, they'll be entirely useless.

vanattab 9y ago
Unless you paid a premium for the "smart" features.
- Spivak 9y ago
  But you probably didn't since at this point it's difficult to find a high end TV that doesn't have some crappy OS built into it.
- michaelbuckbee 9y ago
  My understanding is that it costs the manufacturer something like $5 difference to put what's essentially a Roku into a TV to make it "smart" (which kind of makes sense as you can buy a Roku stick for $30 retails and it has to have a case, cable, box, external hdmi connector, power etc.). The manufacturer then sells the smart tv at a $25-50 premium over the dumb version and it's a decent profit for them. FWIW - I was always skeptical of the onboard TV smart features, but the Samsung TV that I use a computer monitor actually is actually surprisingly decent.
  - cpv 9y ago
    Could you please specify what model of Samsung TV?
    - michaelbuckbee 9y ago
      It was the 2016 model of this: https://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Electronics-UN55MU6500-Curved-55-Inch/dp/B06XGXHVW4 https://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Electronics-UN55MU6500-Curved... As an aside, I absolutely love using it as a monitor hooked up to a MBP.
goldenkey 9y ago
Not exactly. Keep in mind the UEFI debacle with both Intel and AMD. Having an unknown attack vector on an old TV is less than desirable. Aside from privacy, I like to think of it similar to musical keyboards. Back when synths were primitive, it made sense to buy a keyboard that had builtin speakers, synthesizer software/hardware - a smart keyboard if you will. Nowadays, the only thing you would want is a good set of keys. That means a midi controller with a baby grand/grand like keybed. [1] Best of all, it should be a lot cheaper than an all in one. And itll be just as good in 20 years as it is now - youll just run a different synth on your computer. All in ones dont make sense for many things. It may be a trend but its an overzealous and oversold one. Ill stick with my dumb midi instruments and my dumb projector. And hopefully theyll still be with me in 5 or more years. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatar https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatar
- fabian2k 9y ago
  I can just pull the network cable from the TV, which removes pretty much the entire attack surface.
  - goldenkey 9y ago
    Every smart TV has WiFi. Even if you switch WiFi off, its not always off, on many devices.
    - j45 9y ago
      Even if wifi isn't truly off, as long as it's not authenticated to a wifi network before it's turned off it is a measure more safe. If it looks for open networks... that's another thing.
      - goldenkey 9y ago
        I hate playing the "idiot, its obvious. downvoted" target. HN can be so vicious at times when you would expect someone else to fill in the junior level details. I guess my lesson is to include even the simple blackhat explanations. HN is probably lacking of that kind of crowd...maybe to a boon. Anyhow, you are all wrong to disagree with me. There were just CVEs for radio chip exploits a couple of days ago! These have been coming out quite often lately. The layer at which these exploits can be done does not require the TV to be on any network. Not even ad-hoc. Just the fact that it has a listening radio chip that has old firmware is enough to make it extremely dangerous [digitally.] That TV can literally became a wifi enabled worm distribution center, infecting everything in your home. Not worth the risk IMO. I would stick with a dumb TV. "targets didn't have to connect to the attacker's Wi-Fi network. Simply having Wi-Fi turned on was sufficient to being hacked." [1] https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/07/broadcom-chip-bug-opened-1-billion-phones-to-a-wi-fi-hopping-worm-attack/%3famp=1 https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/information-tec...
huehehue 9y ago
Smart TV software can and will interfere with regular operations. My girlfriend's dad got a shiny new Smart TV for Christmas a few years back. He also lives in the sticks and has satellite internet that works maybe every other day. I volunteered to set it up, and what do you know -- the "OS" was gated by a registration / sign in screen. So, no way to access core functionality (including external inputs, settings menu, etc.) without an internet connection. Even if there was some strange ritual that would let me get through (there wasn't), the average user is fucked.
- madjam002 9y ago
  What make is this? Just for future reference so I know to never buy a TV from this manufacturer!

vanattab 9y ago

Unless you paid a premium for the "smart" features.

Spivak 9y ago
But you probably didn't since at this point it's difficult to find a high end TV that doesn't have some crappy OS built into it.
michaelbuckbee 9y ago
My understanding is that it costs the manufacturer something like $5 difference to put what's essentially a Roku into a TV to make it "smart" (which kind of makes sense as you can buy a Roku stick for $30 retails and it has to have a case, cable, box, external hdmi connector, power etc.). The manufacturer then sells the smart tv at a $25-50 premium over the dumb version and it's a decent profit for them. FWIW - I was always skeptical of the onboard TV smart features, but the Samsung TV that I use a computer monitor actually is actually surprisingly decent.
- cpv 9y ago
  Could you please specify what model of Samsung TV?
  - michaelbuckbee 9y ago
    It was the 2016 model of this: https://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Electronics-UN55MU6500-Curved-55-Inch/dp/B06XGXHVW4 https://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Electronics-UN55MU6500-Curved... As an aside, I absolutely love using it as a monitor hooked up to a MBP.

goldenkey 9y ago

Not exactly. Keep in mind the UEFI debacle with both Intel and AMD. Having an unknown attack vector on an old TV is less than desirable. Aside from privacy, I like to think of it similar to musical keyboards. Back when synths were primitive, it made sense to buy a keyboard that had builtin speakers, synthesizer software/hardware - a smart keyboard if you will. Nowadays, the only thing you would want is a good set of keys. That means a midi controller with a baby grand/grand like keybed. [1] Best of all, it should be a lot cheaper than an all in one. And itll be just as good in 20 years as it is now - youll just run a different synth on your computer. All in ones dont make sense for many things. It may be a trend but its an overzealous and oversold one. Ill stick with my dumb midi instruments and my dumb projector. And hopefully theyll still be with me in 5 or more years. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatar https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatar

fabian2k 9y ago
I can just pull the network cable from the TV, which removes pretty much the entire attack surface.
- goldenkey 9y ago
  Every smart TV has WiFi. Even if you switch WiFi off, its not always off, on many devices.
  - j45 9y ago
    Even if wifi isn't truly off, as long as it's not authenticated to a wifi network before it's turned off it is a measure more safe. If it looks for open networks... that's another thing.
    - goldenkey 9y ago
      I hate playing the "idiot, its obvious. downvoted" target. HN can be so vicious at times when you would expect someone else to fill in the junior level details. I guess my lesson is to include even the simple blackhat explanations. HN is probably lacking of that kind of crowd...maybe to a boon. Anyhow, you are all wrong to disagree with me. There were just CVEs for radio chip exploits a couple of days ago! These have been coming out quite often lately. The layer at which these exploits can be done does not require the TV to be on any network. Not even ad-hoc. Just the fact that it has a listening radio chip that has old firmware is enough to make it extremely dangerous [digitally.] That TV can literally became a wifi enabled worm distribution center, infecting everything in your home. Not worth the risk IMO. I would stick with a dumb TV. "targets didn't have to connect to the attacker's Wi-Fi network. Simply having Wi-Fi turned on was sufficient to being hacked." [1] https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/07/broadcom-chip-bug-opened-1-billion-phones-to-a-wi-fi-hopping-worm-attack/%3famp=1 https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/information-tec...

huehehue 9y ago

Smart TV software can and will interfere with regular operations. My girlfriend's dad got a shiny new Smart TV for Christmas a few years back. He also lives in the sticks and has satellite internet that works maybe every other day. I volunteered to set it up, and what do you know -- the "OS" was gated by a registration / sign in screen. So, no way to access core functionality (including external inputs, settings menu, etc.) without an internet connection. Even if there was some strange ritual that would let me get through (there wasn't), the average user is fucked.

madjam002 9y ago
What make is this? Just for future reference so I know to never buy a TV from this manufacturer!