6 ms·

This is gonna be some hefty GDPR fines in Europe.

null_object 5y ago
> This is gonna be some hefty GDPR fines in Europe. I keep hoping this is gonna be the case, but the years roll on, I'm still clicking some stupid consent-popup on every single website I ever visit, and in the meantime TV manufacturers continuously spy on their users, sell their user-data, and push unwanted ads into their interface and even in programs being watched, and apparently no-one (apart from a few of us on HN) seems to care.
- Nullabillity 5y ago
  For what it's worth, at least on my Swedish model, this seems to be gated behind an opt-in (default off!) consent toggle. It was buried in several layers of menus, and not even mentioned during the setup process. So I would assume that this is mostly an issue in non-GDPR regions (or they're doing some really ugly legal shenanigans to ignore the denied consent?).
  - fnord123 5y ago
    "We have a '''legitimate interest''' in getting your personal info, because we want to sell it to third parties" https://www.gdpreu.org/the-regulation/key-concepts/legitimate-interest/ https://www.gdpreu.org/the-regulation/key-concepts/legitimat... > Legitimate interests is most appropriate as a lawful basis where companies use personal data in a way that individuals can reasonably expect. If it impacts individuals, it can still apply if the controller company can justify there is a compelling reason for the impact the processing will have. > Companies can rely on legitimate interests for marketing purposes if they can prove that the data usage is proportionate and fair to the user. It must have a minimal impact on the user in privacy terms and be for a reason that people would not be surprised at. Sadly I would reasonably expect Samsung to sell the data and I would not be surprised by it.
- shawn-butler 5y ago
  Because people keep buying them and no viable competitive manufacturing capability exists in the West anymore. Soon it will violate the warranty not to plug it into the network. Probably for “security” or to protect the children.
- iicc 5y ago
  Support https://noyb.eu https://noyb.eu ? https://noyb.eu/en/our-detailed-concept https://noyb.eu/en/our-detailed-concept >noyb uses best practices from consumer rights groups, privacy activists, hackers, and legal tech initiatives and merges them into a stable European enforcement platform. Together with the many enforcement possibilities under the European data protection regulation (GDPR), noyb is able to submit privacy cases in a much more effective way than before. Additionally, noyb follows the idea of targeted and strategic litigation in order to strengthen your right to privacy. We will also make use of PR and media initiatives to emphasize and ensure your right to privacy without having to go before court. Ultimately, noyb is designed to join forces with existing organizations, resources and structures to maximize the impact of GDPR, while avoiding parallel structures.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
krageon 5y ago
It depends. For that to be on the radar, in most countries you have to contact Samsung and come to a solution with them (or try to) first. Then you have to argue with them about whether or not their anonymisation (which they will surely claim to do) is sufficient. Then when you forward the request to the gdpr institution of your country, you must make reasonable for them why you feel that your request for them to fix it has not been honoured. Naturally this is a process most people do not feel like going through, and as such most companies continue flying under the radar :)
charcircuit 5y ago
Wouldn't that only be a problem if they stored personal data? They could just associate it with a TV id.
- dTal 5y ago
  What? The content of your screen is personal data. There could be anything on that - name, address, passwords, photos of your living room, nudes...
  - charcircuit 5y ago
    They are just feeding image through an alogrithm. Saving it would incur legal problems like copyright and have storage costs. Most people don't use their TV to look at that kind of thing anyways.
    - yardstick 5y ago
      What about when they are hacked/compromised and now an attacker has access to the actual images? Seems way too risky.
      - charcircuit 5y ago
        If we are talking about what aboutisms what about if they didn't send screenshots and then they were hacked and an attacker deployed a new update that spied on everyone.
        MereInterest 5y ago
        That's an entirely different issue, but yes, automatic updates are an attack vector. But that's another step that would need to be performed by an attacker, rather than already having the images available without designing custom firmware.
        charcircuit 5y ago

> This is gonna be some hefty GDPR fines in Europe. I keep hoping this is gonna be the case, but the years roll on, I'm still clicking some stupid consent-popup on every single website I ever visit, and in the meantime TV manufacturers continuously spy on their users, sell their user-data, and push unwanted ads into their interface and even in programs being watched, and apparently no-one (apart from a few of us on HN) seems to care.

Nullabillity 5y ago
For what it's worth, at least on my Swedish model, this seems to be gated behind an opt-in (default off!) consent toggle. It was buried in several layers of menus, and not even mentioned during the setup process. So I would assume that this is mostly an issue in non-GDPR regions (or they're doing some really ugly legal shenanigans to ignore the denied consent?).
- fnord123 5y ago
  "We have a '''legitimate interest''' in getting your personal info, because we want to sell it to third parties" https://www.gdpreu.org/the-regulation/key-concepts/legitimate-interest/ https://www.gdpreu.org/the-regulation/key-concepts/legitimat... > Legitimate interests is most appropriate as a lawful basis where companies use personal data in a way that individuals can reasonably expect. If it impacts individuals, it can still apply if the controller company can justify there is a compelling reason for the impact the processing will have. > Companies can rely on legitimate interests for marketing purposes if they can prove that the data usage is proportionate and fair to the user. It must have a minimal impact on the user in privacy terms and be for a reason that people would not be surprised at. Sadly I would reasonably expect Samsung to sell the data and I would not be surprised by it.
shawn-butler 5y ago
Because people keep buying them and no viable competitive manufacturing capability exists in the West anymore. Soon it will violate the warranty not to plug it into the network. Probably for “security” or to protect the children.
iicc 5y ago
Support https://noyb.eu https://noyb.eu ? https://noyb.eu/en/our-detailed-concept https://noyb.eu/en/our-detailed-concept >noyb uses best practices from consumer rights groups, privacy activists, hackers, and legal tech initiatives and merges them into a stable European enforcement platform. Together with the many enforcement possibilities under the European data protection regulation (GDPR), noyb is able to submit privacy cases in a much more effective way than before. Additionally, noyb follows the idea of targeted and strategic litigation in order to strengthen your right to privacy. We will also make use of PR and media initiatives to emphasize and ensure your right to privacy without having to go before court. Ultimately, noyb is designed to join forces with existing organizations, resources and structures to maximize the impact of GDPR, while avoiding parallel structures.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

krageon 5y ago

It depends. For that to be on the radar, in most countries you have to contact Samsung and come to a solution with them (or try to) first. Then you have to argue with them about whether or not their anonymisation (which they will surely claim to do) is sufficient. Then when you forward the request to the gdpr institution of your country, you must make reasonable for them why you feel that your request for them to fix it has not been honoured. Naturally this is a process most people do not feel like going through, and as such most companies continue flying under the radar :)

charcircuit 5y ago

Wouldn't that only be a problem if they stored personal data? They could just associate it with a TV id.

dTal 5y ago
What? The content of your screen is personal data. There could be anything on that - name, address, passwords, photos of your living room, nudes...
- charcircuit 5y ago
  They are just feeding image through an alogrithm. Saving it would incur legal problems like copyright and have storage costs. Most people don't use their TV to look at that kind of thing anyways.
  - yardstick 5y ago
    What about when they are hacked/compromised and now an attacker has access to the actual images? Seems way too risky.
    - charcircuit 5y ago
      If we are talking about what aboutisms what about if they didn't send screenshots and then they were hacked and an attacker deployed a new update that spied on everyone.
      - MereInterest 5y ago
        That's an entirely different issue, but yes, automatic updates are an attack vector. But that's another step that would need to be performed by an attacker, rather than already having the images available without designing custom firmware.
        charcircuit 5y ago