5 ms·
42% of the apps on LG's platform have these quasi-malware SDKs in them? Seems kinda bad, whether it's due to negligence or just pure incompetence? You'd think t
by 12_throw_away 3mo ago
42% of the apps on LG's platform have these quasi-malware SDKs in them? Seems kinda bad, whether it's due to negligence or just pure incompetence? You'd think there might be legal consequences for a corporation that lets their app store turn into a malware delivery system?
- drnick1 3mo agoIt's not "quasi-malware," it is malware.
- b3orn 3mo ago15 years ago people would've called it spyware.
- TeMPOraL 3mo ago20 years ago people would've called it a trojan horse. But then, by standards of two decades ago, every website that cannot legally avoid showing a GDPR popup would be classified as malware. As it should be today. Alas, standards have changed.
- tosti 3mo agoThere were no cookie popups 20 years ago.
- ledoge 3mo agoI think they meant that the use of cookies for analytics/tracking, which is what triggers the popup requirement, would have been considered malicious.
- TeMPOraL 3mo agoIndeed.
- _joel 3mo agoErr, there were, prepare to feel old "Cookie consent pop-ups first started appearing following the adoption of the ePrivacy Directive in 2002" 25 years!
- reactordev 3mo agoI beg to differ, there absolutely was cookie popups. We also had popup windows, popup ads, java applets that melted your cpu, and browsers with no grid. Oh, and we had Shockwave and Flash…
- efreak 3mo agoSome browsers would individually request you approve each cookie s website set. This is a feature of the browser itself that the website is unable to control. Lynx still has this option, I believe.
- blagie 3mo ago> But then, by standards of two decades ago, every website that cannot legally avoid showing a GDPR popup would be classified as malware. As it should be today. Alas, standards have changed. I don't think you've read GDPR. In Europe (at least my part), *every* organization has a GDPR policy you need to agree to. Your child's school. Summer camps. Etc. Most are also conservative and reasonable. What's broken is the GDPR popup with a dozen "legitimate interest" toggles for spying on you.
- matthewmacleod 3mo agoThat was exactly the point OP was making.
- mrguyorama 3mo agoThat pop up is not required by GDPR You only need explicit consent from the user for tracking you do not require for valid business purposes It's like complaining that OSHA sucks because every time you visit the grocery store you have to sign a waver that if they throw you in a wood chipper, you cant sue them. That problem is not with liability wavers! What feels really crummy to me is how many people don't seem to know that websites cannot really prevent you from using them if you reject optional cookies, so average people are afraid that if they say no, they can't use websites.
- ge96 3mo agoFunny some you can't say no, so I'm like alright guess I'm not going in
- amelius 3mo agoYes, let's put the Overton window back where it used to be.
- inigyou 3mo ago... If it was spying—,it isn't
- Manuel_D 3mo agoMy understanding is that these apps' TOS explains that by using the app you consent to having third party traffic routed through your device. For example [1] the Hola VPN's free users agree to let third party traffic get routed through their networks. Now, how closely users actually read the TOS is a different story, but it's arguably not malware on the grounds that users are, at least on paper, informed and agree to this behavior. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hola_(VPN) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hola_(VPN)
- thatguy27 3mo agoNope, still malware. Arguing that people can technically read the TOS is (maliciously?) ignoring the social contract that most of us live by (i.e. don't trick people and screw them).
- inigyou 3mo agoMy understanding of malware is that it must cause some problem for the user.
- einsteinx2 3mo agoSlowing down your internet connection due to using your bandwidth without your knowledge, getting blocked by websites due to malicious traffic from your IP address, extra annoying captchas due to the same. Those were just the first 3 things off the top of my head.
- inigyou 3mo agoGot plenty of bandwidth, sites block you regardless, you get captchas regardless. Plus, IP addresses rotate once a day so you're just as likely to get someone else's bad reputation anyway. To sue them you'd have to show some actual, concrete harm. For example you contact a site that is blocking you and they tell you it's due to a certain request and you trace that request to the proxy.
- qlte 3mo ago> Plus, IP addresses rotate once a day This is entirely specific to the user’s ISP, my “dynamic” IP goes months without changing. And I would be miserable if I were subjected to the volume of captchas and blocks on my regular internet connection that I see on the occasion I use Tor.
- nikanj 3mo agoThey've seen the ruckus that follows from controlling / curating the app store experience. For example, see the comments at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45017028 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45017028
- coldtea 3mo agoThat's for a general purpose computing platform that a smartphone is. This is for a fucking TV.
- SethMurphy 3mo agoPhone is now smart phone. TV is now smart TV. Very unfortunate. Glad my 2007 Sony Bravia still works, even if only standard HD.
- aaron695 3mo ago[dead]
- paulddraper 3mo agoSome might say that a smart phone and a smart TV have a lot of similarities.
- coldtea 3mo agoAnd those people will be wrong. Besides, there's no shortage of dumb phones and featurephones on the market. We want the same for TVs.
- JumpCrisscross 3mo ago> You'd think there might be legal consequences I own an airgapped LG TV. Does anyone actually want to go class action/mass arb?
- tjoff 3mo agoAirgapped is harder than you might think. If your TV finds an open network (neigbours?) it will use that one. And it is only a matter of time before they have cellular capabilities too.
- JumpCrisscross 3mo ago> Airgapped is harder than you might think Probably. The LG TV I have doesn't have cellular, but does have a removeable Wifi/Bluetooth module [1]. You have to disconnect a ribbon, unscrew the module and then pop it out. [1] https://www.manualslib.com/manual/3140596/Lg-Oled83g3-Series.html https://www.manualslib.com/manual/3140596/Lg-Oled83g3-Series...
- bombcar 3mo agoSometimes those "modules" are just the antenna, and the Wifi is quite capable of connecting with no antenna at all.
- dzdt 3mo agoMake it a tinfoil hat :-)
- ssl-3 3mo agoAll radios (including those that do wifi stuff inside of televisions) need an antenna in order to perform wireless communications. An antenna may be obvious and external (like one on the fender of a 1979 Ford Pinto), or built with very deliberate PCB traces (as with a Raspberry Pi), or incidental (some component of the device behaves as an antenna, even if unintentionally), or a combination of these things, or something else entirely. But whatever its form: An antenna must be present or wireless RF communication simply can't occur.
- iso1631 3mo agoLG's own code is quasi-malware
- Cthulhu_ 3mo agoIt's all above board though, as you, the user, agreed to the terms & conditions for installing said app. This won't change unless governments create and enforce laws.
- quotemstr 3mo agoIt is, though. Why should I not be able to agree, with sufficiently informed consent, to route traffic through a connection I operate via a computer I own using software I've chosen of my own free will to install? What's the difference between running a Tor exit node and a "residential proxy" except optics? Look: I'm 100% for banning secret proxies that hide from the user, but stopping people knowingly and voluntarily running these proxies is a violation of fundamental software freedom tenets.
- windward 3mo agoIt all comes back to this. I pay for the network, I'm liable for it: I decide what comes through it.
- ozlikethewizard 3mo agoThe difference is the user. Your average smart TV user doesn't know what a residential proxy is, hell who's installing/playing the games but children? Consumer regulation to protect consumers from a knowledge disparity that leads to uninformed consent isn't a bad thing imo.
- quotemstr 3mo ago[flagged]
- ethbr1 3mo ago[dead]
- ozlikethewizard 3mo agoDid I say that? Regulate the companies that produce the products not the products themselves.