Amazon Echoes, Google assistants, etc.,

[Markje]

Moby, you are incredible. How can you do it?
OK, truth us that you don't actually know what you are doing.

In terms of taking stuff out of context, I was quoting the conclusion of the piece, the part that the whole article builds up to.

As we also know now, from the accidental reveal of Amazon's recordings, there is stuff being recorded of which users are unaware.

Moby, go get help. It is late in your life but never too late to get help.

Amazon records private conversation and sends it to a random contact (2 links, same issue):
https://www.engadget.com/2018/06/01/amazon-echo-alexa-spying/
https://www.engadget.com/2018/05/24/amazon-echo-record-conversation-and-sent-to-random-contact/

Eavesdropping made easy with Alexa:
https://www.checkmarx.com/2018/04/25/eavesdropping-with-amazon-alexa/



"It is outrageous that the Amazon Echo is recording every conversation in a person’s home and transmitting it to the cloud,"
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/may/31/ro-khanna/your-amazon-alexa-spying-you/

The devices constantly listen for a user to say a "wake word," which triggers Alexa to begin recording voice data and respond to commands. Wake words include "Alexa," "O.K. Google," and "Hey Siri."

[/quote]
Matched up with:

The Washington Post’s Fowler, who has an Echo, Google Home and Apple HomePod, said his devices go rogue on a regular basis.

"At least one of them starts recording, randomly, at least once per week," he wrote. "It happens when they pick up a sound from the TV, or a stray bit of conversation that sounds enough like one of their wake words."

False positives aside, technology experts told us it’s against Amazon policy to constantly record customers’ private conversations, as Khanna claimed.

"There's no proof or confirmation from Amazon that Echo products record ‘every’ conversation in a person's home," said Tiffany Li, a privacy attorney at Yale Law School’s Information Society Project. "Indeed, Amazon has publicly stated that the Alexa products only record after hearing users say wake words."

But Li (Lawyer) noted that Amazon has been less-than-forthcoming about the circumstances surrounding its recording practices.

For the lazy readers, I bolded the important sentences who thinks Amazon's public statement is the truth.

Just the URL title is enough: How amazon *CAN* spy on you when your echo is shutdown.....
Doesn't mean they do it, but they *CAN*. So if a secret FBI order is given and forbids Amazon to talk about it, you're being recorded without your knowledge. They don't even have to plant a bug in your house, having a google-home, amazon-echo or apple-siri is enough.
https://www.news.com.au/technology/gadgets/how-amazons-alexa-can-spy-on-you-even-when-your-echo-is-shut-down/news-story/5ba1eccaf3544b14d9d08cf24c946b7f

which is why researchers at the security firm Checkmarx started fiddling with Alexa, to see if they could turn it into a spy device. They did, with no intensive meddling required.

"We actually did not hack anything, we did not change anything, we just used the features that are given to developers," says Erez Yalon, the head of research at Checkmarx.

https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-echo-alexa-skill-spying/

A team of security experts from China's Tencent corporation demonstrated the attack at a hacker convention this weekend.

"After several months of research, we successfully break the Amazon Echo by using multiple vulnerabilities in the Amazon Echo system, and [achieve] remote eavesdropping," the hackers told Wired.

https://www.wired.com/story/hackers-turn-amazon-echo-into-spy-bug/

The rest of the results-pages of google (I checked the first 5, all relevant news articles) are here:
https://www.google.com/search?q=amazon+echo+spies+on+you

And for the absolutely rocksolid "they don't spy on you"  crowd:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5182577/How-Google-Amazon-SPYING-you.html
(thats right, patents filed, describing exactly how/why they spy on you.
Reasons include:
Government compliance for federal law enforcement
Advertisement revenue)

Happy google'ing , use the devices but be aware you will have 0 privacy left. Absolutely 0.

They will know when you went to the toilet, how big your dump was en when youre banging the missus.

Mark.

[msmoby]

Thanks, Markje - really - for your detailed response

I have a s/w Wireshark VPN and use it in ubiquiti hardware ..

I observe LOTS of IoT hardware and traffic patterns and yet .... I'm still happier to use Amazon at home than trust Google - who dropped their original 'putting you first' and now act as got spies ... When the Sochi winter Olympics were on traffic went to 'another place' -  before Google  - and they covered it up

WhatsApp is THE most popular messenger in Russia.. it also uses end-to-end encryption - like Telegram  ,,impossible to give gov agencies the 'keys', right ?

"WhatsApp, Viber lead among messaging apps in Russia - study
Tuesday 18 September 2018 | 16:22 CET | News
WhatsApp is the most popular messenger in Russia, installed on the smartphones of 69 percent of respondents in a poll carried out by Deloitte, reports RIA. Viber and Skype followed with 57 percent and 45 percent, respectively. In total, 93 percent of the smartphone users used messaging apps."






I was interested to see what was 'off topic' and your response shows that you aren't in the ISP biz in either Russia or the UK

I KNOW where to look as I have security access to telco data exchanges ...  I know Mrs May feels the need to have such kit in UK ISPs ...just can't see how it will 'help' in the age of burner phones and the WhatsApps,Vibers, et al of this world

My attitude is that I'm not doing / saying enough to warrant serious attention from any agency and if they have a good laugh at my posts / photos / audio- 'welcome'

[msmoby]

Moby, you are incredible. How can you do it?
OK, truth us that you don't actually know what you are doing.

Wow, andrewfi  - you are on a role of daftness when it comes to what you DON'T know about me,,,,  I've been selling VPNs and involved in supplying network solutions for nigh on twenty years ... 

In terms of taking stuff out of context, I was quoting the conclusion of the piece, the part that the whole article builds up to.

Yes, I realise it as under the heading 'conclusion' - but the more knowledgeable reader of said article - having read and actually UNDERSTANDING the TESTS understood that this was a hunch - rather than any provable evidence of 'spying'

As we also know now, from the accidental reveal of Amazon's recordings, there is stuff being recorded of which users are unaware.

You mean: "“Echo woke up due to a word in background conversation sounding like 'Alexa.' Then, the subsequent conversation was heard as a “send message” request. At which point, Alexa said out loud 'To whom?' At which point, the background conversation was interpreted as a name in the customer’s contact list. Alexa then asked out loud, '[contact name], right?' Alexa then interpreted background conversation as 'right.' As unlikely as this string of events is, we are evaluating options to make this case even less likely.”





Thanks, for the 'advice' - but I'm not the poster repeatedly posting risible assertions as to my off-board existence and failing repeatedly - big time ...

[Markje]

Thanks, Markje - really - for your detailed response

I have a s/w Wireshark VPN and use it in ubiquiti hardware ..

I observe LOTS of IoT hardware and traffic patterns and yet .... I'm still happier to use Amazon at home than trust Google - who dropped their original 'putting you first' and now act as got spies ... When the Sochi winter Olympics were on traffic went to 'another place' -  before Google  - and they covered it up

WhatsApp is THE most popular messenger in Russia.. it also uses end-to-end encryption - like Telegram  ,,impossible to give gov agencies the 'keys', right ?

"WhatsApp, Viber lead among messaging apps in Russia - study
Tuesday 18 September 2018 | 16:22 CET | News
WhatsApp is the most popular messenger in Russia, installed on the smartphones of 69 percent of respondents in a poll carried out by Deloitte, reports RIA. Viber and Skype followed with 57 percent and 45 percent, respectively. In total, 93 percent of the smartphone users used messaging apps."






I was interested to see what was 'off topic' and your response shows that you aren't in the ISP biz in either Russia or the UK

I KNOW where to look as I have security access to telco data exchanges ...  I know Mrs May feels the need to have such kit in UK ISPs ...just can't see how it will 'help' in the age of burner phones and the WhatsApps,Vibers, et al of this world

My attitude is that I'm not doing / saying enough to warrant serious attention from any agency and if they have a good laugh at my posts / photos / audio- 'welcome'

Whatsapp is end to end encrypted but whattsapp is also the root cert authority.  Care to guess how hard it is to inject a wiretap for whatsapp? (Not hard at all).

No i dont work in the telecom business no need to guess as i said where i work.

[Manny]

I never quite trusted Whatsapp. I don't use it. Apparently, random people whose number you might save or otherwise have suddenly see your profile info/photo and then have a direct line to you without your express permission? I want less mither not more.

I was always a Skype fan but now use it less and less since on desktops one must tie it in with a Hotmail account or Microsoft ID or something, and I don't have one of those and don't want one so it doesn't work really. It still works OK on my phone but I must sign in to see messages so end up replying a week late........

Since my dealings in China I've become a big Wechat fan. That seems to do everything you need and more. Best of all, the world and his wife in the west aren't on it and no assumed permissions so no mithering. 

[Herrie]

I never quite trusted Whatsapp. I don't use it. Apparently, random people whose number you might save or otherwise have suddenly see your profile info/photo and then have a direct line to you without your express permission? I want less mither not more.

I was always a Skype fan but now use it less and less since on desktops one must tie it in with a Hotmail account or Microsoft ID or something, and I don't have one of those and don't want one so it doesn't work really. It still works OK on my phone but I must sign in to see messages so end up replying a week late........

Since my dealings in China I've become a big Wechat fan. That seems to do everything you need and more. Best of all, the world and his wife in the west aren't on it and no assumed permissions so no mithering. 

Instead of CIA and GHQ, you got the Chinese equivalent looking over your shoulders on WeChat...

.

[msmoby]

I never quite trusted Whatsapp. I don't use it. Apparently, random people whose number you might save or otherwise have suddenly see your profile info/photo and then have a direct line to you without your express permission? I want less mither not more.

Then you didn't read what you 'agreed' to when signing up .. IF you LET it WhatsApp, Skype, et al will search in your contact lists and show you they are on the same platform and they will see you ..

I was always a Skype fan but now use it less and less since on desktops one must tie it in with a Hotmail account or Microsoft ID or something, and I don't have one of those and don't want one so it doesn't work really. It still works OK on my phone but I must sign in to see messages so end up replying a week late........

No .. you do NOT need a microsoft account or MS based email address

Now this REALLY anuses me - given the control the Chinese have over platforms and monitoring

Since my dealings in China I've become a big Wechat fan. That seems to do everything you need and more. Best of all, the world and his wife in the west aren't on it and no assumed permissions so no mithering. 

 

In the context of this thread and spying - it's hilarious

@Markje

I gave my 'guru' the 'flu - so please do not think I accept what you've said about WhatsApp .. it might apply to groups - but surely not two individuals.

Lots of people I know also using Signal..

Once again, I'd worry FAR more about Google than Amazon

[B.B.]

Instead of CIA and GHQ, you got the Chinese equivalent looking over your shoulders on WeChat..

My first thought as well.

B/B

[Manny]

I never quite trusted Whatsapp. I don't use it. Apparently, random people whose number you might save or otherwise have suddenly see your profile info/photo and then have a direct line to you without your express permission? I want less mither not more.

I was always a Skype fan but now use it less and less since on desktops one must tie it in with a Hotmail account or Microsoft ID or something, and I don't have one of those and don't want one so it doesn't work really. It still works OK on my phone but I must sign in to see messages so end up replying a week late........

Since my dealings in China I've become a big Wechat fan. That seems to do everything you need and more. Best of all, the world and his wife in the west aren't on it and no assumed permissions so no mithering. 

Instead of CIA and GHQ, you got the Chinese equivalent looking over your shoulders on WeChat...

Perhaps, but I'm sure nothing I do is of any concern to them.

[Herrie]

I never quite trusted Whatsapp. I don't use it. Apparently, random people whose number you might save or otherwise have suddenly see your profile info/photo and then have a direct line to you without your express permission? I want less mither not more.

I was always a Skype fan but now use it less and less since on desktops one must tie it in with a Hotmail account or Microsoft ID or something, and I don't have one of those and don't want one so it doesn't work really. It still works OK on my phone but I must sign in to see messages so end up replying a week late........

Since my dealings in China I've become a big Wechat fan. That seems to do everything you need and more. Best of all, the world and his wife in the west aren't on it and no assumed permissions so no mithering. 

Instead of CIA and GHQ, you got the Chinese equivalent looking over your shoulders on WeChat...

Perhaps, but I'm sure nothing I do is of any concern to them.

Neither what I do, but the Chinese state, their social rating/scoring of it's people, continuous monitoring etc makes Orwell's 1984 look innocent. So not a big fan.

.

[Manny]

Neither what I do, but the Chinese state, their social rating/scoring of it's people, continuous monitoring etc makes Orwell's 1984 look innocent. So not a big fan.

I'm with you on that, except for the fact that they don't make any attempt to hide it and everyone knows about it. So people can make their choice with pre disclosure.

For you and I as laowais, the Chinese government gain no benefit or useful information from spying on us and we are only caught in the dragnet. Whereas the US, UK or other European governments and corporations have more to gain by spying on us. And can do us more harm as a consequence.

I don't trust any government or large corporation, but my data is of much more use to Uncle Sam, Google, Amazon, Facebook or whoever here than it is to the Chinese government, Wechat or Huawei.

[Markje]

Abit of light humour on this subject... From a Dutch home-insurance company:

[andrewfi]

I was watching a thing on TV the other day. In China, driving on motorways. They have gantries every few hundred meters with cameras. OK, same, same as the UK and, apparently, serving a similar function - identifying cars and tracking them, plus recording speeding and other driving offences.

In the UK, as Britons know, these cameras are present but do not announce their presence or activity. In China, they have the decency to flash every time a car passes within their range. Upside, albeit slight, one knows that one is being watched and are reminded of it. The downside, it looks bloody distracting!

In London, and I am sure, other places, there are surveillance cameras running face identification. USAians who displease the regime find it hard, if not impossible, to fly anywhere. The much-welcomed advances in electric and autonomous vehicles make it possible to control or stop the travel of anyone, or all of us. Imagine a world in which one's car would simply refuse to drive to any location the government or other authorities decided we should not visit.

Anyone who labours under the illusion that we are not being watched is, well, under an illusion. As we can see, when it comes to information collection surveillance. The only differences between China and 'The West' is the exact mode of surveilance implementation.

[AvHdB]

Andrew, Have you ever seen Enemy of the State?Yes Hollywood but still perhaps 10 years on watchable.

[andrewfi]

Andrew, Have you ever seen Enemy of the State?Yes Hollywood but still perhaps 10 years on watchable.

Nope, never seen it. Is it a documentary?

[Contrarian]

Andrew, Have you ever seen Enemy of the State?Yes Hollywood but still perhaps 10 years on watchable.

Nope, never seen it. Is it a documentary?

It’s a very exciting thriller with Gene Hackman and Will Smith. I definitely concur with Av, it’s highly watchable.

I would highly recommend it to anyone. 9/11 was the coup d’etat against the American people which allowed the so called “patriot act” and the police state we’re living under.

May Bush Jr and his father both burn in Hell for eternity for the destruction they’ve wrought upon the USA and the World as a whole.

[msmoby]

In the UK, as Britons know, these cameras are present but do not announce their presence or activity.

Untrue

There are CLEAR signs that announce the ( possible) presence of cameras to counter:

1/ speeding - even mobile units

2/ jumping traffic lights

3/ entering restricted zones whereby a fee is payable ( e.g congestion / emission charges )


The cameras have to be BRIGHT YELLOW ..The average speed ones do not flash

In London, and I am sure, other places, there are surveillance cameras running face identification.

Re surveillance cameras in PUBLIC places - use of by Police ( trials)

https://www.met.police.uk/live-facial-recognition-trial/

Anyone who labours under the illusion that we are not being watched is, well, under an illusion. As we can see, when it comes to information collection surveillance. The only differences between China and 'The West' is the exact mode of surveilance implementation.

Methinks andrewfi HAS watched @enemy of the state;

[Markje]

Andrew, Have you ever seen Enemy of the State?Yes Hollywood but still perhaps 10 years on watchable.

The sad fact is, that what was possible in this movie, is childs play compared to what they do today.

[Manny]

I was watching a thing on TV the other day. In China, driving on motorways. They have gantries every few hundred meters with cameras. .....

In China, they have the decency to flash every time a car passes within their range. Upside, albeit slight, one knows that one is being watched and are reminded of it. The downside, it looks bloody distracting!

Yes, they flash at each car in China and the distraction soon wears off. The thing is, I reckon it's mostly a propaganda tool. They dont have the manpower to examine each photo for people not wearing a seatbelt or using a phone, etc., as they claim to do. Some small automated fines got from ANPR go out by mail from them. They mostly record number plates to make sure a car doesn't spend too long in a province its not registered in. If it does it may indicate someone registered a car in a neighbouring province to save money or circumvent quotas in big cities. 

[andrewfi]

Moby:
1) You are not as dumb as you pretend, thus you are being dishonest, again. Boring.
2) Note I was making a direct comparison between gantry cameras in China and the UK. Yes, you are not that dumb, hence the dishonesty.
3) Surveillance cameras on gantries on UK motorways do not indicate their presence as the Chinese ones do. If you look for the UK ones you will see them, but they are not signed in any way.
4) The UK has a network of surveillance cameras at road junctions, again, as with the gantry cameras, these are not signed in any way, but they record each car that goes past them.

[msmoby]

This is PRICELESS given andrewfi fails on his 'estimations' of my life off-board, how Oligarchs got rich at the time of the fall of the USSR and MUCH more ..

 

Moby:

Note I was making a direct comparison between gantry cameras in China and the UK. Yes, you are not that dumb, hence the dishonesty.

Gantry cameras in the UK come in two flavours :

a) Average speed check - no flashes - BRIGHT YELLOW  - and lots of warnings before and during

b) Speed Enforcement  - as one passes said camera - flashes ( twice) to take two shots and if someone tries to contest - road markings support the distance travelled  - also BRIGHT YELLOW - with plenty of warnings and if it is a van - it has bright red and yellow stripes - plus warnings preceding the check

IF one has a social media linked app like WAZE - some motorists post where mobile cameras are

Surveillance cameras on gantries on UK motorways do not indicate their presence as the Chinese ones do. If you look for the UK ones you will see them, but they are not signed in any way.

Those cameras are used to monitor traffic flow and on digital motorways - used to swiftly close lanes / reduce speed limits ( variable speed limits ) - the cameras used to ENFORCE on such gantries are either painted bright yellow - or the area behind the gantry is painted BRIGHT YELLOW ( like the Bredbury 50MPH bend - clockwise) on the M60

4) The UK has a network of surveillance cameras at road junctions, again, as with the gantry cameras, these are not signed in any way, but they record each car that goes past them.

From the RAC:

"These are CCTV cameras monitored by Highways England and used to monitor traffic, not to issue speeding fines.

They’ll alert the Highways England if there’s an incident or congestion on the motorway, so that emergency services can be sent out if required – and local and online media can issue warnings.

Visually, they look like ordinary CCTV cameras; they’re mounted in tall poles or overhead gantries. They will be painted grey or white; they will not be marked in yellow as they merely capture footage rather than detecting speed."

Now, you MAY be referring to



These do record the car's number plate ( tag ) but the data  used to "to monitor traffic flow and provide estimated journey times across the network"

In the case of a serious criminal case - the authorities can ask for the data on a suspect's vehicle's movements  to be checked

Police and DVLA inspectors can and do use ANPR to check against insurance co., MOT and Road Fund licence databases

https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/cameras/motorway-cameras/

Conclusion:

Surveillance cameras don't have ANPR  built in

[Markje]

And the failings of these devies just keep on coming:

https://it.slashdot.org/story/19/11/04/2054230/with-a-laser-researchers-say-they-can-hack-alexa-google-home-or-siri

 In one case, they said, they opened a garage door by shining a laser beam at a voice assistant that was connected to it. They also climbed 140 feet to the top of a bell tower at the University of Michigan and successfully controlled a Google Home device on the fourth floor of an office building 230 feet away. And by focusing their lasers using a telephoto lens, they said, they were able to hijack a voice assistant more than 350 feet away. Opening the garage door was easy, the researchers said. With the light commands, the researchers could have hijacked any digital smart systems attached to the voice-controlled assistants.

They said they could have easily switched light switches on and off, made online purchases or opened a front door protected by a smart lock. They even could have remotely unlocked or started a car that was connected to the device. The researchers, who studied the light flaw for seven months, said they had discovered that the microphones in the devices would respond to light as if it were sound. Inside each microphone is a small plate called a diaphragm that moves when sound hits it. That movement can be replicated by focusing a laser or a flashlight at the diaphragm, which converts it into electric signals, they said. The rest of the system then responds the way it would to sound.

[andrewfi]

Moby, why did you write so many words to agree with what I wrote while trying to claim otherwise?

Your life must be so empty at the moment.

[msmoby]

Sighs - in response to Markje

We now have 3 Amazon Echo devices ( Mark 1 Show) and a couple of Echo Dots.

Purchasing via voice  is turned off and  Home Security is via a separate ( prototype) IoT system I am evaluating re security

It has proved invaluable when Ma has locked the house from the inside - so I couldn't get in - and I couldn't wake her up, as she had left the land-line phone off the hook and her Mobile ( cell ) phone was out of battery ..

A chorus of Echoes softly calling out her name and suggesting she open the door - got the desired result ..


The 'drop in' feature - whereby the Echoes answer automatically - turning into a PA system - saved a night sleeping in the car

[msmoby]

Moby, why did you write so many words to agree with what I wrote while trying to claim otherwise?

Your life must be so empty at the moment.

Dear Andrewfi,

 This is a post from months ago and my life was as full as it is, now ..

Once again, don't try to compare others' lives with yours...  Your 'evaluations' - are as 'accurate' and entertaining as ever ..  I can report that we are healthy and happy and the 'we' is the same 'scrawny ass' that's been in my life ( sixth year) ..




Why to you feel the need to prove you can't read English ?


Here's a clue ... How many people get off re speeding fines on the technicality that they cannot say - with certainty WHO was at the wheel  in the UK ?

Take your time.....