Programmer Finds Way To Liberate Ransomware Affected Smart TV, Thanks To LG (theregister.co.uk) 161
Television production factory LG has saved Darren Cauthon's new year by providing hidden reset instructions to liberate his Google TV from ransomware. From a report on The Register: The company initially demanded more money than the idiot box was worth to repair the TV and relented offering instructions for resetting the telly after Cauthon took to Twitter to express his displeasure. The infection came after the programmer's wife downloaded an app to the TV promising free movies. Instead, it installed the ransomware, with a demand of US$500 to have the menace removed. Cauthon said LG offered factory reset steps which are not publicly revealed nor known to its customer support technicians. He says a family member showed him the TV over Christmas laden with ransomware purporting to be a FBI message bearing a notice that suspicious files were found and the user has been fined.
programmers wife!... (Score:2)
yeah right!
Re:programmers wife!... (Score:5, Insightful)
I am still trying to figure out why the person's profession or skill set even matters in this story?
"LG gives user unpublished reset instructions" is more appropriate of a title.
Re:programmers wife!... (Score:5, Insightful)
One of the biggest problems in IT and CIS is the assumption that if one is capable on one's particular field, that one is capable in all fields. This simply isn't true in most examples; most people are jack-of-all-trades or are master of a single discipline, and some are jack-of-all-trades and maybe master of one or two in particular. No one is master of all trades.
I will agree that the bulk off the summary is crap. It goes off onto a tangent but doesn't adequately flesh-out that tangent.
Re: (Score:2)
Physics reduces to Math
Bullshit. I have never heard anyone but you say that. If anything math describes physics.
Re: (Score:2)
Semantics. If that is true than Physics describes Chemistry, Chemistry describes Biology etc etc etc. Making Sociology the 'king science'...We know that isn't true.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We're beating this to death.
None of the statements in the standard physicists rant are true. Chemistry does not reduce to Physics, but if it did, then Physics would similarly reduce to Math etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You have to admit the same thing happens to lawyers and physicists. Physicists are so notorious for it, they even have a meme ('all science reduces to physics'), which I brought up and criticized.
Re: (Score:2)
Theoretical physicists should have their car hoods welded shut, for their own protection.
Re: (Score:3)
A programmer is much, much more likely to pirate.
A programmer is more likely to pirate "properly." A non-programmer (e.g. a programmer's wife) is more likely to screw things up by blindly installing Free Warez.
Re: (Score:2)
He married his right hand...
That will only make it worse when she cheats on him.
Welcome (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
No one said anything about owning the software. In the contraty, this is usually about NOT running the manufacture provided firmware. (OpenWRT for example)
Or to stick to your restaurant example in its full absurdness: We are talking about paying a menu in a restaurant and then leaving early and cook at home instead. (The main difference is, that most of the money paid for a tv is for the hardware, and so writing of the cost for software you paid for by not using it is usually neglegible.)
Re: (Score:2)
No one said anything about owning the software. In the contraty, this is usually about NOT running the manufacture provided firmware. (OpenWRT for example)
Or to stick to your restaurant example in its full absurdness: We are talking about paying a menu in a restaurant and then leaving early and cook at home instead. (The main difference is, that most of the money paid for a tv is for the hardware, and so writing of the cost for software you paid for by not using it is usually neglegible.)
So since it's absurd to do that in your restaurant analogy, it's absurd to want the software for the TV, therefore proving GPs point?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it is absurd to want the rights to the tv software. But no one wants that.
Re: (Score:3)
It's getting to become the norm where the cost of developing the software IS a large chunk of the cost of goods of a piece of equipment. Such costs are called, "non-recoverable expense" and is amortized over the estimated number of pieces to be sold.
Re:Welcome (Score:5, Interesting)
>It cost the manufacturer millions just to develop that software. Do you think by you get the right to own it just by paying a few hundred bucks?
There's a right to repair movement and I agree with them. If I can't repair it myself, I don't buy it. Simple. They can rationalize it however they want, I don't care. The argument "but it is so expensive to the manufacturers" doesn't really work. So are cars. So what?
Get with the times bro! (Score:2)
Install the latest microcode for your processor
https://sites.google.com/site/... [google.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Welcome all to a world where you don't own nor are allowed to alter the software on items you purchased outright.
It cost the manufacturer millions just to develop that software.
I'd be happy if they spent those millions in making better TVs. I have a cheap external box to deal with all the other features that no TV no matter how expensive can remotely compare to price-wise. I know they wish to own the consumer, but that boat sailed a long long long time ago.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's like saying you ate at a restaurant, so you're now partial owner of that restaurant and demand access to their secret recipes.
It's more like saying that since you paid for the food, you have the right to add salt, pepper or any other seasoning of your choosing in order to enjoy the food, that you purchased, in the manner that you choose.
LK
Re: (Score:2)
https://munchies.vice.com/en/articles/a-florida-chef-is-inciting-a-class-war-over-ketchup [vice.com]
Re: (Score:2)
That's a terrible analogy. When you go to a restaurant you only "own" the food on your plate and your body gets rid of it a few hours later. A TV isn't a single serving electronic you have around for a few hours.
More like you bought a car so maybe you should be able to do with it as you please, and even have the right to repair it yourself?
Re: (Score:3)
That's a terrible analogy. When you go to a restaurant you only "own" the food on your plate and your body gets rid of it a few hours later.
I think you're on to a better analogy.
For TV, you "own" the show content until you're done processing it (ie. you rent it, or have a temporary license to it). So, where's the TV/software/restaurant fall in there?
* food = content/shows/etc
* salt/pepper = ff/pause/rewind/mute
* restaurant = network (abc/nbc/etc)
* chef/waiters/staff = content producers (director/actor/etc)
* tv = plate/fork/knife/etc
* tv OS = Miss Manners rules for using your utensils and how to properly consume your food
If you eat at a restaura
Re:Welcome (Score:5, Informative)
It cost the manufacturer millions just to develop that software. Do you think by you get the right to own it just by paying a few hundred bucks?
Well since it runs on Android, which is a version of Linux, which is distributed under the GPL, for free, the short answer is basically yes, costing the manufacturer $Millions is unlikely, $10's of thousands is probably stretching it.
The manufacture won't hand you the source code, because that will compromise his trade secrets and therefore, harm his business.
The kernel portions are distributed under V2 of the GPL and they must absolutely be available, the Android portions distributed by Google/Android have source code available. My guess is that since the factory reset occurs during the device being in a switched off mode, it hooks into the linux kernel and is either GPL'ed or Google/Android source code.
Re: (Score:2)
I can legally demand copies of the source code from any manufacturer who's distributing televisions with GPLed software without also providing source code. As long as we're talking about GPLv2, I cannot require anyone to allow me to install any changed software on my TV, so I can't necessarily use it.
This is one of the differences between Linus Torvalds and Richard Stallman: Torvalds is happy being able to look at any adaptations of the Linux kernel and incorporate what he likes into his version, and S
Re: (Score:3)
Welcome all to a world where you don't own nor are allowed to alter the software on items you purchased outright.
It cost the manufacturer millions just to develop that software. Do you think by you get the right to own it just by paying a few hundred bucks? That's like saying you ate at a restaurant, so you're now partial owner of that restaurant and demand access to their secret recipes. You have the right to use the product, but don't own the design. The manufacture won't hand you the source code, because that will compromise his trade secrets and therefore, harm his business.
The main issue is that the "Smart" (read connected) TV is exposed to millions of hackers and that's the stupid part. More connected something is to the internet, the more vulnerable it is. If the world continues down this moronic path for more convenience, there'll be a day when hackers will lock you out of your house when they seize control of your smart door.
No, it's more like saying he bought a plate of food at that restaurant and can do whatever he wants with the food. See how that works? He can eat it as they prepared it, add salt and pepper and steak sauce then eat it, take it home and make changes to it, give it away, throw it away, the possibilities are endless.
Re: (Score:2)
I know it's hard for someone who has access only to epoxy-embedded devices to believe that, but it's true.
Re: (Score:3)
If you don't like the terms, don't buy the product. Let the free market sort things out.
Thats nice. I'll just buy out the water supply and include "Your first born become my slaves" in the terms of service. Let the free market sort things out, if they don't want to give me their first born they are welcome to die of thirst about 2 days later. That free market really works.
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't like the terms, don't buy the product. Let the free market sort things out.
Thats nice. I'll just buy out the water supply and include "Your first born become my slaves" in the terms of service. Let the free market sort things out, if they don't want to give me their first born they are welcome to die of thirst about 2 days later. That free market really works.
I wasn't aware that LG had a monopoly on televisions.
Re:Welcome (Score:5, Insightful)
Show me where in the terms is said, "While this television is an Android-based computer and reasonably accepted industry standards include a way of reloading fresh operating software from scratch on such computers, this computer has no such function."
The "everything's a computer" IoT industry has a LONG way to go in terms of disclosing limitations of the devices they're producing. Both sides of the techy and non-techy world have expectations for these devices that are generally agreed upon for other devices of their type in either the consumer electronics or computing device camps. Non-techies have a reasonable expectation that a TV is a box that shows pictures and can't be infected by malware. Techies understand that smart TV's are actually computer that might have malware vulnerabilities and further presume that like all other computers they should have some way to reset them and completely erase any infection.
Manufacturers are falling short of both camp's expectations, and they're also failing to disclose the true nature of the devices to consumers. They're producing devices that are simultaneously unprecedentedly vulnerable by TV standards and unrepairable by computer standards. The only way for a consumer to find these things out is to buy it and find out the hard way. That's not acceptable.
Re: (Score:3)
That's not acceptable.
It is acceptable to me. Your opinion is different, and I get that, but blanket statements like this are almost always untrue.
These "Smart" TVs are incremental "feature" upgrades to regular TVs. They literally cost a small transaction difference in price to similar but non-smart TVs. That small incremental price difference is a huge profit center for the manufacturers. It literally costs them next to nothing to install, and increases the price $100. This feature differentiator is key to driving profits up, s
Re: (Score:2)
This exactly, and until the DMCA gets gutted, the consumer will continue to get screwed over. The DMCA won't get fixed until people stop with the us vs them trap and demand that politicians represent the interests of the voters instead of the interests of the lobbyists.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with copyright reform is that copyright problems are a small cost to very many people, and sometimes an opportunity cost (the makers of "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" would have included Popeye characters if not for copyright protection), while people who benefit from copyright abuse make a considerable profit from it. Therefore, a politician can represent the public's interest, and get essentially no credit for it, or the MAFIAA's, and get campaign contributions.
Twitter (Score:3)
Android bootloader (Score:5, Interesting)
FTA: "With the TV powered off, place one finger on the settings symbol then another finger on the channel down symbol. Remove finger from settings, then from channel down, and navigate using volume keys to the wipe data/ factory reset option."
It sounds like the common procedure to enter the Android boot loader. Anybody wants to "fastboot oem unlock" that TV?
Don't buy a smart TV (Score:5, Insightful)
They have no purpose. Most people now simply use TVs as monitors for a set top box and if you need any more functionality simply plug your computer or tablet into a normal TV. Why anyone would pay a significant extra amount of cash for an oversized underpowered android tablet I have no idea.
Re:Don't buy a smart TV (Score:4, Insightful)
It will probably get harder and harder to find a TV without these "smart" features. If you don't want them, just don't give the TV your wifi password.
Re:Don't buy a smart TV (Score:5, Insightful)
It will probably get harder and harder to find a TV without these "smart" features. If you don't want them, just don't give the TV your wifi password.
We are fast approaching a time where the TV will come with built in cellular data, and lifetime subscription (for specific uses). I've already seen several devices that have this scheme... for example a 'cloud punch clock'.
You might have to enter your wifi password to stream 4k from netflix, but it might send its telemetry, get advertising updates, firmware updates, and its cloud 'siri/cortana/google voice recognition stuff' via a separate always-on cellular network connection.
The price of the chipset itself is small in a $2000+ TV; and the cost of prepaid data measured at likely less than 500MB per years for 10 years, bought at wholesale for a million TVs at once... well... that's also going to be pretty small.
Right now the IoT is at least theoretically constrained to our wifi and runs through our firewalls. But we're fast approaching the time where it's just directly connected to the carrier bypassing our home networks entirely.
Indeed, our home networks themselves may become a nerd relic, the way home servers are. Your computer connects to the cloud, your printer connects to the cloud, your TV connects to the cloud... who needs a LAN? Sure a LAN would be faster... but once its good enough the average user will be happy to forgo having to maintain a home network in exchange for 'it just connects to the cloud'.
Re: Don't buy a smart TV (Score:2)
Nothing a screwdriver and soldering iron can't fix.
Re: (Score:2)
loopback plug....
Re: (Score:2)
That is a bit disturbing as there probably won't be a way to disable that without voiding the warranty. And possibly ruining the device unless you really know what you're doing.
Re: (Score:3)
The best part, of course, is that "lifetime" will mean "for the expected lifetime of the device", which means that after a few years, they can stop paying for the cellular service and brick the device, forcing you to buy a new one. And even if they don't, the carriers will drop support f
Re: (Score:2)
Just buy a Roku, it will last longer and is inexpensively replaced if there's newer must-have stuff in the future.
How do you connect to the "cloud" without a network? Wi-fi is LAN, or are you assuming LAN is only ethernet? Nobody out there is going to give you a free cellular data plan, or any cellular data plan as convenient as broadband.
Re: (Score:2)
How do you connect to the "cloud" without a network? Wi-fi is LAN, or are you assuming LAN is only ethernet?
I said cellular. I meant cellular.
Nobody out there is going to give you a free cellular data plan
Yeah. They will. It's already happening.
http://www22.verizon.com/whole... [verizon.com]
"Verizon's Mobility Services include wireless voice, text messaging and wireless data packages for both 3G CDMA & 4G LTE. Adding our Mobility Services to your product suite lets you offer variety in voice and data services that keep your customers productive - at the office and on the go. Additionally, you will retain and grow your customer base with Verizonâ(TM)s Mobility Services as the tech
Re: (Score:2)
1GB of data over 5 years isn't going to get you very much television.
Re: (Score:2)
Quite so, but my hypothesis was that that the cellular channel would be for advertising, telemetry, forced software updates, etc. You'd still need to put the TV on your wifi to stream netflix etc.
Re:Don't buy a smart TV (Score:5, Interesting)
Also if you do give the smart tv your wifi password be prepared to block its MAC address at the router if you want it to not connect anymore.
My samsung tv I gave it the wifi password and ten switched inputs to wired network connections to prevent the tv from getting online. That I thought worked until I checked the router logs one day and noticed the tv was still trying to and sending data via wifi even though it was disabled.
So I blocked the MAC address of the wifi adapter and no more hidden data to be sent
Re: (Score:2)
It will probably get harder and harder to find a TV without these "smart" features.
If you shop at BestBuy and their ilk, sure. Go online, do your research, and order a commercial model. They can even be very similar to the consumer models, but with the bloat removed. My current TV is the commercial version of a consumer model, which means the TV tuner and speakers aren't included. It even cost less.
Re: (Score:2)
Well personally I want a TV tuner and speakers with my TV, so that wouldn't work for me. Maybe there are other models with those included though.
Re: (Score:2)
It will probably get harder and harder to find a TV without these "smart" features. If you don't want them, just don't give the TV your wifi password.
I've heard of TVs sniffing around for open access WiFi connections. So if any of your neighbors has open WiFi, or the coffee shop at the end of the street offers free public WiFi, your TV could be connecting anyway. And don't forget, the GPS in the TV will let them know where you live, so it won't give you any anonymity either.
I really think it is worth the extra money to get a non-smart TV if you can find one.
Re: (Score:2)
Quite right, it could still report quite a bit of information. At least it wouldn't have access to your home network though.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. But how does one know for certain if the TV really is not smart or if it's just playing dumb?
Re: (Score:2)
Don't plug in the Ethernet cable/give it your WiFi password. Smart TV becomes dumb again.
Re: (Score:2)
And if there is some dumb arse in an apartment nearby that has an open and unsecured wifi access point?
And lets not forget the possibility that these devices are just passively scanning wifi nets and running basic cracking techniques against secured spots. Dictionary scans, then trying keys with a-z, A-Z and then harder keys. They can keeps this up the entire time it's in standby mode. The device just sits there.
Now, if they would just mine bitcoins passively and with low power consumption, they would actua
What's the alternative? (Score:5, Insightful)
They offer, what the manufacturer believes you want in one package.
I too would rather just buy a nice 65" monitor — because I have a capable set-top box running my IPTV apps and a nice surround-sound setup already — but there aren't any good ones for sale. Or, rather, there are, but they all have the "smart TV" built into them — and I am as annoyed about paying for the "smart" features and the extra hardware they require (USB-readers and WiFi), as people used to be about paying the "Microsoft Tax".
But there is no alternative at the moment. Which means, people like me (and you) are a tiny minority... I guess, it would cost the manufacturers more to make and ship the separate models without these add-ons, than to simply bundle it all in.
Re: (Score:2)
There are alternatives, but you have to look for them. You won't find them at the mass market big box store, and certainly not on prominent display.
Re: (Score:2)
Citation needed. Do give an example of a 4K-capable 65" monitor, that costs significantly less than $1200 [amazon.com] without the "Smart" features (and, preferably, without built-in speakers as well).
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you. That's neat, but this is still a TV — with a tuner and built-in speakers. It is unclear, what OS it has, but it must be something capable of making use of the USB-port, that is listed in the specs [sceptre.com]. So, it may not be as "smart" as the LG in TFA, but it still has features well beyond, what I'd like. It is not purely a monitor...
It may be a good value for $800, but there are still features I don't want.
Hating on Walmart? (Score:2)
What's to dislike about that?
What's to dislike about that?
It is almost like someone has told [washingtonexaminer.com] you to hate Walmart [economist.com], but you just can't help yours
Re: (Score:2)
The problem here is that Walmart sells things of inferior quality without properly communicating that to the customer. I've never seen any signs in a Wal-Mart pointing out that the Levi jeans are a special Walmart-only version without the quality of Levi jeans elsewhere. That's something I found out elsewhere.
Without adequate information, cheap crap drives expensive quality out of the market. Walmarts have a habit of showing up and selling apparently identical merchandise for less, driving the store
Re: (Score:2)
That's new — the Anonymous OP I was replying to made no allegations of the Walmart-only TVs being lower quality. Reduced feature-set — yes. But he never mentioned quality issues — indeed, his parents are, reportedly, happy enough with the purchase for him to recommend the shop to /. colleagues.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Easier said than done. I've been looking for a 40" 1080p LED TV without smart tv that comes from a major manufacturer and have been coming up fairly empty.
Re: (Score:2)
if you are in Europe try the bargain bin brands, they are almost all manufactured by one company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
those are very basic big panel + super basic _non smart_ controller at very low prices.
Re:Don't buy a smart TV (Score:4, Interesting)
They have no purpose. Most people now simply use TVs as monitors for a set top box and if you need any more functionality simply plug your computer or tablet into a normal TV. Why anyone would pay a significant extra amount of cash for an oversized underpowered android tablet I have no idea.
Yet a 50+" monitor costs a LOT more than a 50" TV. Even more than a smart TV. A 55" monitor costs about $1400, at the low end. A 55" smart TV costs about $450 (going by Amazon).
Re: (Score:2)
Where I'm at, Internet through the satellite and is metered, but 4Glte through my phone isn't, so anything that gets to the TV from the internet goes through my Android phone, with anti-virus software installed on it first. The whole concept of a smart TV just seems weird.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But where do we buy a new dumb TV these days? :(
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:"Programmer finds" (Score:5, Funny)
He found them in his e-mail inbox.
FBI has an image problem (Score:5, Interesting)
That people believe such "warnings" in large enough numbers to make it worthwhile for the crooks to make them, is a sign, that FBI has an image problem.
It is an organization we fear, rather than one we trust (such as to hunt the scammers down). And they had this image problem for so long now, one can begin suspecting, it is not just a perception...
Re: (Score:3)
Ironically, the same people that fall for these scams usually think nothing of ignoring the FBI warnings that play at the beginning of movies...
Re: (Score:2)
The thing is that ransomware doesn't just flash a warning: it prevents you from using your device. This isn't just people falling for a fake FBI image; it's people desperate to get back their expensive hardware (and possibly files).
The scam would work just as well if the ransomware flashed a legitimate-sounding, but fake, name for a government organization.
Re: (Score:2)
If you illegally torrent your movies, I doubt you'll see the FBI warnings. Another advantage of copyright violation: you can get a superior product. This is preaching to the choir when you're positive the sinners who need the sermon are not in the church.
Re: (Score:3)
It is an organization we fear, rather than one we trust (such as to hunt the scammers down). And they had this image problem for so long now, one can begin suspecting, it is not just a perception...
You're veering off-topic but if you do a relatively small amount of research into the topic including Gallup polls [gallup.com], you find that social trust in the United States has plummeted for many years and the latest generation, the Millennials, have the lowest social trust. It's been gradually declining: Silent > Boomers > Gen X > Millenials. If you really care about this issue do your research because it's going to take a monumental effort to change the course of our culture. We're essentially devolvin
Re: (Score:2)
A monumental effort on who's part? It seems to me that this monumental effort would have to be on the part of the politicians and government workers. But how likely is this? Especially with Trump coming into office.
Blame Trump (FBI has an image problem) (Score:2)
Trump is fairly unique — though sometimes compared to Reagan, he is different from him in many ways too. So, it would seem, that it was other kinds of politicians, who got the country into its current state of social distrust. Whether Trump will help alleviate the problem or not, making such nasty predictions about him as you just did reveals nothing, but your own hateful partisanship.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would politicians care about what people think of them? They get elected over and over again. Most people can't stand politicians, but their own isn't too bad, it is everyone else's that is horrible.
I don't know about you, but I am pretty sure that there is good reason to NOT believe government agencies (like the FBI) are not fully working FOR the American people.
Re: (Score:2)
Especially with Comey running the FBI. A lot of people I run into are either upset at him for his information release days before the election, or upset at him because they think he lied to help Clinton escape prosecution (I couldn't find a case of unintentional mishandling of classified material in my search that resulted in criminal prosecution, BTW).
Re: (Score:2)
We Boomers rocked,
Re: (Score:2)
We Boomers rocked,
Rocked in what sense? Mastering the art of charlatanism? The majority of Boomers were not very well educated because their journey of self growth and exploration so much more important maaaan to the point that they ditched formal education. When it became apparent to you that was not a sustainable way to live in a socio-economic system, you realized you actually needed to get a decent job but didn't have skills nor the means to pay for education. You didn't want to lower your standards to the bottom run
Re: (Score:2)
Rocked in what sense? Mastering the art of charlatanism?
Bingo! Trump, Clinton and Sanders, the millennials are still falling for that crap! Global Warming, Affordable Healthcare Act, Russian Hackers, need I go on.
Re: (Score:2)
Rocked in what sense? Mastering the art of charlatanism?
Bingo! Trump, Clinton and Sanders, the millennials are still falling for that crap! Global Warming, Affordable Healthcare Act, Russian Hackers, need I go on.
Um you need to check your facts here. Bernie Sanders is in Silent generation. Trump is BARELY in the Boomer generation. The silent generation went through 1945, Trump was born in 1946. Hillary is also barely in the Boomer generation but moreso than Trump being born in 1947.
Better examples would be Jamie Dimon, John Stumpf, Jordan Belfort, Jeff Bezos, Steve Ballmer etc. Those are the kind of droids you're looking for.
Re: (Score:2)
That people believe such "warnings" in large enough numbers to make it worthwhile for the crooks to make them, is a sign, that FBI has an image problem.
I disagree. It's really a people problem, such as people not understanding technology very well. I know a guy who is a blue collar worker and he can barely use a PC enough to read and send email and surf the web. He has admitted to me that he's clicked on one of those "We've found a virus on your PC. Click here to pay for our scanning program to save your PC!" popups and sent money to those people. People often don't understand the technology well enough to know what's real and what isn't and they're o
Re: (Score:2)
My point was not about scamware in general, but rather a subset of it, that purports to be FBI. You don't need to understand technology to trust a law-enforcement agency to not accuse you, if you've done nothing wrong. Frightening victims with such accusations should be a net-loss for scammers — some of us may, indeed, get scared, but most should, upon seeing a reference to FBI, relax: "FBI? They'd never ma
Re: (Score:2)
It's also a problem with technical devices behaving differently from earlier devices. Until cars became computerized, I wasn't going to find that driving past a particular billboard or tuning to a particular radio station would cause problems with it. I could understand what was a threat to the car, and what sort of threat it represented, by a very basic knowledge of the mechanics involved. It was fairly easy to tell whether X was a threat to Y, and what sort of threat it was.
Fast forward to when visi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The ransomware described in TFA was not made for television. The picture shows the letter on its side — no one watches TV that way. The scammers targeted phones and tablets — the TV just happened to run the same OS.
...discontinued Google TV. (Score:2)
Not Simple (Score:4, Informative)
With the television, you have even more buttons to worry about, so trial and error would take a very long time.
LG Customer Support Fail (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
that reset info should be public knowledge (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Says you. What if the factory reset makes the TV unusable or crippled without doing something requiring special tools or knowledge? What if it's an attack vector? I'm not claiming that these would be well-designed TVs, just that they could happen. IIRC, LG provided a reset procedure that they thought adequate against the threat models when the set was designed, but which didn't get around the malware.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure the courts are gonna slam them for their completely legal and common business practice.
Re: (Score:2)
She's a pirate and a moron, apparently. Good job humiliating your wife!
In all honesty I'd open a message titled as a " FBI message bearing a notice that suspicious files were found and the user has been fined.". I'd open it as a text file as normal, but open it just the same.