2 ms·
It's only because "telemetry" (i.e. spyware) has been so pervasive that the suspicions arose. Does anyone else remember the "dew sensors" in VCRs and other tape
by userbinator 2y ago
It's only because "telemetry" (i.e. spyware) has been so pervasive that the suspicions arose. Does anyone else remember the "dew sensors" in VCRs and other tape equipment? Those were around before pervasive mass surveillance, and didn't cause the same suspicion.
Attempts to connect over the network are obvious in the log
Which log? The one on the device itself, whose software has a history of ignoring what the user wants? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24838816 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24838816
- pixl97 2y agoWith a VCR it's probably going to be a lot harder to get a false detection than a phone which is a device that gets carried everywhere.
- vel0city 2y agoWho didn't carry their VCR with them everywhere? How else were you going to record the kid's soccer game? https://www.rewindmuseum.com/images3/2400woman2.jpg https://www.rewindmuseum.com/images3/2400woman2.jpg
- accrual 2y agoIndeed. The author continues: > Maybe its reports could have been embedded in other analytics data passed to Apple later, but there was absolutely no evidence that the results of liquiddetectiond went beyond the confines of my Mac. I feel like this is plausible. Apple /could/ record any non-zero results from this daemon in some regular diagnostics package and upload it to their database of hardware UUIDs + associated Apple ID. But at the same time, why bother? If the user brings in a laptop for service they'll find out about any liquid damage then, surely it's recorded in some unclearable diagnostic area of memory. Not beaming this data on demand seems in line with Apple's privacy etiquette, but we may never know for sure.