11 ms·
Amazon's Sidewalk Network Is Turned on by Default. Here's How to Turn It Off
- raxxorrax 5y agoI think those that have Alexa devices don't care that much about privacy anyway. Those that do care about it probably have no Alexa devices. If such networks kills the industry of lawyers hunting copyright infringements, I have no problem with that.
- wang_li 5y agoSidewalk is very low bandwidth. I doubt anyone is going to use it for piracy so as to be able to create reasonable doubt.
- linuxftw 5y agoSure, today maybe. I'm sure the ToS state explicitly they're free to do whatever they want in the future, without prior notice to you.
- raxxorrax 5y agoTrue. I have developed some skills and IOT integration for Alexa, so I have quite a collection of devices. So maybe with my array of echo dots...
- jimktrains2 5y agoDoubting anyone would do something is usually a losing proposition. Not just copy infringement, but getting around parental filters, too. I can see a myriad of reasons someone might try to use this connection for things they dont want on their own network.
- lxgr 5y agoAmazon's traffic is essentially forwarded through a VPN, so there should never be any liability concerns. On a technical level, it's not even IP forwarding but rather some heavily tunneled and encrypted protocol stack, and I doubt that it's possible to get the IP of a forwarding Sidewalk device.
- raxxorrax 5y agoThat was my thinking here. Probably it isn't possible for security reasons but it would also need to be artificially exposed. This could all be very nice tech, if it wasn't for surveillance ambitions and too curious corporations. If I were Jeff Bezos, I totally would use it.
- lxgr 5y agoUnfortunately, the article doesn't give any reasons as to why somebody might choose to opt-out of the network except for bad analogies: > If suddenly my devices are going to start connecting to my neighbor's WiFi, or theirs to mine, it seems like you'd have to opt-in, right? I can already connect to my neighbor's wifi, and they can connect to mine: Our ISP broadcasts a separate "public" SSID, which is routed over a separate IP address and available to all of their customers via a captive portal. It also has its own bandwidth allotment (unlike Sidewalk, but bandwidth use there is probably very low).
- commandlinefan 5y agoThis has been my dream for the internet since I first saw it: a completely decentralized communications network beholden to nobody. Sure, Amazon is controlling this mesh network, but once the concept is proven, there can be/will be others. This is a Good Thing or at least a step in the right direction.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jimktrains2 5y agoThere are a couple wifi mesh networks using commodity hardware already running in different places. I'll find a list and post it later.
- ctdonath 5y agoThe key is getting the behavior normalized in broad distribution. A few specially-arranged mesh networks is interesting, but not ultimately that useful. I've long expected the likes of Linksys to deliver routers with mesh network default-on (and sensible mitigation of over-using someone's paid ISP), with much better odds of market saturation reaching the critical mass necessary for broad use.
- elliekelly 5y agoCuba has had an almost-mesh internet using blue tooth on cellphones for at least a decade. It’s pretty cool. I remember using it and being told about it when I traveled there in ~2013 but I can’t for the life of me remember what it’s called so I’ve never been able to read more about how it came about. IIRC before the bluetooth they passed around USB thumb drives so I think it was born from that “network” of information sharing but my Spanish skills are pretty terrible and it was many years ago so I could be completely wrong.
- navbaker 5y agoFrom the screenshots in the article, it looks like this is "all-or-nothing". Does this mean that folks who don't want their network talking to the neighbors' can't have a mesh network running at all or is there a separate toggle to "only enable mesh networking for my devices"?
- sharklazer 5y agoThe GRU/KGB had to come in when you weren’t home. Now you pay to have microphones spying on you. Is anyone else as creeped out that John Brennan is on the board?
- gccs 5y agoAbsolutely. There is no way he is not pushing the agenda of the CIA. I'm not surprised at all since large corps and the CIA worked together so well in south america
- 29083011397778 5y agoYou're thinking of a communist society. America is capitalist; the latter is market-driven, and the citizens pay for their own microphones to spy on them.
- ranrotx 5y agoApple effectively did the same thing with AirTags and turning everyone’s iOS device into a listening post for the Find My network, but there’s no uproar there.
- syntaxstic 5y agoIsn't that locked down through iCloud?
- da_big_ghey 5y agoI am trusting more the apple than the amazon. Former is having privacy as key of brand image, so not in interest for to violate privatcy. I am also still not use the apple track tag but am understanding why there exist more trust for these.
- throwawaw 5y agoWTF is with this Borat-level parody of "bad English"? That's not how people actually sound when English is their second language, and you didn't sound like that two months ago. What's with the act? (Sorry, mods, for the unrelated thread. It's just so weird.)
- asdfasgasdgasdg 5y agoWow that is really interesting. This person was writing regular, fluent sounding English sentences and then around 73 days ago they switched over to writing like this. I agree, it's very strange.
- tjpnz 5y agoAlmost as if they had a Kevin moment from The Office thinking it's somehow more efficient to communicate this way.
- da_big_ghey 5y agoIt in the past was from another user of site, he was desiring a new name and gave to me the old. In this way I am able to use down vote with no wait.
- alistairSH 5y agoDoes anybody else see this setting in the Alexa app? It isn't there in the app on my iPhone.
- greenpizza13 5y agoYes, I see it. Maybe you need to update?
- StavrosK 5y agoIt's not in mine either, maybe it depends on the country.
- alistairSH 5y agoUSA here. With a single Echo Dot on my account.
- Twirrim 5y agoNo. US based, android user. I've checked for updates in the market. It's not present for me.
- CivBase 5y ago> That's because Amazon has enabled Sidewalk on every capable device by default. Whether or not you want your device connecting to other devices, or want your neighbors connecting to your WiFi, Amazon went ahead and made Sidewalk opt-out. Privacy concerns aside, how is this legal in a world where data caps and limited bandwidth exist?
- gccs 5y ago>how is this legal Don't you remember reading about it in the terms and conditions?
- ctdonath 5y agoLegal via that EULA y'all clicked "Agree" on without reading. Practical via monitoring network traffic density, and only using a small percentage of that (say, 1%).
- Yizahi 5y agoTo paraphrase an old saying - "Amazon is too big to do illegal stuff". They, and other megacorps, have transcended most of the plebeian laws and are slowly getting close to a full independence.
- AlexandrB 5y agoThe article describes the reason why this is opt-out as such: > To be fair, there's a good reason it did. A mesh network of devices requires, well, a mesh. That means Amazon needs as many devices as possible to have the feature turned on. If it required you to enable it on your own, Amazon knows that almost no one would. So Amazon's business reasons are "good reasons", but my privacy/bandwidth/etc. reasons are secondary at best. This sums up the relationship between companies and their customers in the modern tech industry: You take what we'll give you, and you'll like it. At some point we're going to have to come up with a concept like "informed consent" for these things.
- TeMPOraL 5y agoI wonder what would be a good solution here, if you really wanted to offer something of value (without treating your users as a product), that depended on the users opting in? Most people won't opt in, out of convenience, it's pretty much a fact of life. You could incentivize them - say, pay them for being a part of the network and performing a service for others. But a dishonest vendor could just make the purchase price higher by the amount they expect to pay out to the user over service's lifetime. The inherent flexibility/relativity of prices seems to be making it too easy for businesses to scam the customers in general. "Ad subsidizing", "razor-and-blades" model, fake paybacks... is there even a way to ensure that a business that pays you something with one hand, doesn't try to take it back with the other one?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- vineyardmike 5y ago> is there even a way to ensure that a business that pays you something with one hand, doesn't try to take it back with the other one? Hold tighter when they try to take it back. No there is no way to ensure that businesses don't try to maximize profits. Its the same reason you want the thing of value for lowest cost.
- smolder 5y agoTo get what we want out of businesses, we'd need an intelligence behind the buying power. Supply side holds all the cards for steering consumer tech, because buyers aren't generally informed and coordinated enough to flex their collective control, unlike on supply side where everything is super consolidated. We've got no "buyers unions", the big brands are basically unavoidable to average consumers, so big brands do what they want.
- hourislate 5y agoThere is a simple solution to this botnet and others. Don't buy these devices, any convenience is out weighed by privacy concerns. Resist becoming a NPC.
- pfisch 5y agoCalling a person an NPC is a good way to throw away your credibility and sound like an incel.
- raxxorrax 5y agoIsn't every man an incel between sexual intercourse?
- rideontime 5y agoAre you suggesting that every moment a man is not engaging in sexual intercourse is involuntary?
- at_a_remove 5y agoBehold as I trade one shallow insult ("NPC") for another with even less depth ("incel")! Oddly, people most likely to use the "incel" insult are somehow against sexual objectification, despite the fact that they have reduced the entirety of someone's value as to whether or not they get laid. It's a bit of self-contradiction that rarely gets examined.
- SquareWheel 5y agoBy "NPC", do you mean a sheep?
- p49k 5y agoNot good enough, we need severe regulation. These companies are playing a game that’s unwinnable for consumers. The respectable device from Brand A you own today will auto-update 2 years from now to one with privacy-invading bloatware. You can’t do anything about it because you would need the security updates which are part of the update. If you switch to Brand B, then over time they’ll do the same thing while Brand A slowly transitions to the “respectable” company. Rinse and repeat.
- varispeed 5y agoHow is that not a bandwidth theft? If a small company did something like this, probably owners would have been arrested by now...
- smbv 5y agoFor some reason, this site doesn't work with third party JS disabled (it returns a 404). For those who prefer a better link: https://archive.is/lqAd2 https://archive.is/lqAd2
- Yizahi 5y agoI wonder if users are now liable for the CP or other illegal data being downloaded through the mesh? I think I remember that Comcast, when they have enabled public network on private routers, have created a separate network with separate ID and that supposedly is enough to protect router owners from legal problems. But here mesh is using the same (single) network all devices use in the household. So if someone will abuse their mesh connected device to download illegal data and traffic will pass through your main network, are you liable for it too?
- wildmanx 5y agoGenerally, it's uploading that tends to get you in legal trouble, not downloading. (Counter to quite some propaganda out there.)
- jaywalk 5y agoThat's not even possible. Sidewalk doesn't create an open Internet connection, it's basically a VPN back to Amazon.
- flavius29663 5y agoso when some CP gets on the Amazon servers, they must report that to the authorities, right? by law! Now, the upload came from your device....did you do it or did someone else?
- jaywalk 5y agoWhat are you even talking about? Do just a little research on how Sidewalk actually works, please.
- flavius29663 5y ago> how Sidewalk actually works It matters very little how it's designed to work. If it can be abused, it will. Encryption can be broken, protocols can be circumvented. It's why we have physical covers for webcams, because they can and are used by malicious parties, even though it should be possible.
- opwieurposiu 5y agoThe only amazon thing we have is the kids tablet. I think it is called a fire. Does anyone know if the kids tablets have sidewalk?
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago"If it required you to enable it on your own, Amazon knows that almost no one would." If it is not something people would turn on then perhaps it is not something they need. This is another case of "ask for forgiveness instead of permission". A simple hyopthesis applies to the "products and services" of the "tech" industry: If they required a fee, users few to none would pay for them. The only way to test this hypothesis is to start charging fees.
- nixgeek 5y agoTurned on by default makes me think I have to locate a setting to switch off, and sounds insidious? But I recall my Echo Show prompts for choice on Sidewalk during initial setup?
- sumthinprofound 5y agoI just took a look at the Sidewalk website as it pertains to Ring devices. Per the site, Sidewalk is enabled on the Ring Floodlight Cams but not the doorbells (for now at least).
- teekert 5y agoPerhaps I would leave it on to help the network, same as with AirTags and iPhones. What I don't want is any of my devices to find the internet without my specific approval. That is a much more important thing for me to be able to turn off. (i.e., I don't mind if people use a small amount of my bandwidth if there is no risk to me. I do mind my Samsung smart TV with a mic getting online without me knowing about it, because I don't trust that mic in my living room and assumed not giving it my WiFi password would keep it offline.)
- _understood_ 5y agoThe worst part is that I KNOW 100% that I opted-out of this at least 6 months ago, but to my surprise it was still enabled in the Alexa App when I double checked this AM. SMH. Do I need to take a screen shot and physically print it out and mail it to Amazon HQ? Sheesh. I live in the PNW, and avid reader of GeekWire. They wrote a piece in December of 2020 about this issue and the forced Opt In scenario with Sidewalk and Comcast for those curious: https://www.geekwire.com/2020/amazon-sidewalk-rollout-shows-future-forced-opt-taking-lessons-xfinity-wifi/ https://www.geekwire.com/2020/amazon-sidewalk-rollout-shows-...
- cptskippy 5y agoI disabled it as well but when I went to check if it was still disabled, the option isn't there. Was it removed and will be added back and enabled by default again? Is this the from beta to live transition? How many people think they've disabled it only to have it re-enabled?
- geoduck14 5y agoI just tried to disable it, and the option wasn't available.
- slovette 5y agoMine was there just now. The Amazon Apps are awful on IOS, I often have to wait a few for a page in the app to fully load with all the options/settings.
- cptskippy 5y agoIt's awful everywhere. The Privacy screen doesn't load at all on Android for me, it flashes up for a moment then an error displays. I have to open the Web App to view it.
- igaloly 5y agoFrom a psychological standpoint, people are more likely to keep the default as is - even if the opt-out is super simple. I assume, unfortunately, this will grant Amazon a lot of benefits.