fuck offffff

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 77 points 2 months ago (22 children)

The people who called me crazy because "there's no way your phone can be listening in on you all the time" are the same people who are going to be the most excited about this "feature"

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 months ago (20 children)

    How did these people expect "Hey Siri" / "Hey Google" to work?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 months ago* (19 children)

    Im a perfect world, as they claim, its a secondary system listening that isn't recording or transmitting anything, and is meant to be low power. If it hears the wake up word, it wakes up the other mic and starts recording.

    Thats how they claim the smart speakers work anyway.

    This would be different.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [+] 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (5 children)
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    It doesn't need to, that's the issue, there is so much other data you are generating that can be harvested. Nothing you talk about is completely random, so it's incredibly easy to build profiles about you, without listening to a single word.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    I think you'd be surprised, there is always a connection. Oh some middle aged millennial waxing poetic about nostalgia? Wow, totally haven't heard that before, and it's certainly not the singular thing every company is capitalizing on in media currently. No, you are absolutely unique and Google is simply listening to every conversation about you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago*

    I had this happen many years ago, to the point there was no chance something wasn't listening. We suspected it was my partners iPhone with Facebook installed before they got better about preventing abuse like that, as it was a Facebook ad that showed up.

    Were talking about something where we never use the product, would never use the product, but it came up in a conversation just between the 2 of us, and there were ads the next day.

    It happened a few times.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (11 children)

    "How they claim?" Is there no way to confirm that?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    I have a memory of people black boxing it and seeing power usage and network traffic that supported the claims but that was a snapshot in time and as others note its all proprietary.

    It takes a lifetime to build a good reputation, but you can lose it in a minute.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    They ship with proprietary code, this would be the point of open source.

    In practice in my experience, every company is at least skirting the law regarding privacy, and I never worked for one big enough that could lobby itself out of a fine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    would this not be detectable by tracking the data sent through your network?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    I used to run forensic network capture and analysis tools.

    First thing, traffic is encrypted. All you will see is a blob of traffic passing through. You used to see hostnames with TLS, but now with quic, you see nothing. This makes it hard.

    You could root the phone and install a root ca certificate for a decrypting proxy, you might see more, but the data itself (not just the transport protocol) could be encoded or even encrypted within the network encapsulation.

    Next, you'd have to reverse engineer the protocol if they're using something nonstandard. Also, malware can often be set up to "behave" when it can detect analysis. I'm all but certain Google would do this.

    Maybe you could do statistical analysis of the traffic and attempt to baseline normal vs when it's transmitting audio. It would be a bit of a blind guess at best.

    If I had more time, I'd love to try it. I have an old pixel7 pro. Maybe I can sort something out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    People have already done that and shown that no the device isn't listening to you 24/7 and sending all your data out. There are plenty of papers on the subject, and it makes sense. Why record, decode and analyze all audio when your digital footprint is so much easier to compile and analyze. People aren't random, so it's easy to put them into statistical buckets of how to target them. Here is one reference paper (of many): https://recon.meddle.mobi/papers/panoptispy18pets.pdf

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    You look for network traffic. You might not be able to see inside the packets, but you can know when they're sending packets, and how many. As far as I know, voice assistant systems that claim to use a secondary local circuit to detect calls are telling the truth.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    That's kind of what I was wondering, I figured this as well as a way to track that it is at least sending data at unusual times. Someone else in this thread explained that actually determining what that data is would be difficult yeah: https://lemmy.world/post/48510943/24408747

    I don't know enough about system security or forensics to evaluate this, but it does make sense based on what I know.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago*

    I dont know. You'd need to reverse engineer the hardware and software to be confident, and could a OTA update then sneak a bypass in anyway?

    Edit: i think Amazon might have abandoned this as well and always records on echos now too.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago

    Doesn't need to track you all the time to know exactly who you are and what you're up to.

    Continuously monitoring is such a waste of their resources, they already know everything about you, they just need to check in now and then to make sure you're buying the correct t-shirts.

  • source
  • parent