10 comments

  • altairprime 11 hours ago
    In the Twitter thread linked, the person confirms two things:

    1. It saturated the local network with 1TB of metadata sniffing scans, not the network uplink to the outside world.

    2. It does so because, as Keurig notes, it’s collecting data about your household in order to let Keurig sell it to advertisers.

    • Grombobulous 4 hours ago
      I don’t dispute the purpose of the data collection, but I can’t believe this quantity of data collection is intentional.

      There’s no way Keurig is has the intention of paying the kind of costs required to collect a terabyte of data every two weeks for millions of people who own their coffee makers.

      There must be some kind of bug here. I imagine if you unplugged it and plugged it in again the data usage would settle down.

      • mindslight 2 hours ago
        Probes create much more traffic locally than it takes to backhaul a summary of their results.
        • sgillen 2 hours ago
          1TB still smells like a bug
    • whycome 10 hours ago
      Why is this allowed? There’s no way to consent to a coffee machine.
      • Neywiny 10 hours ago
        Presumably during setup and connection to the AP it has a ToS. Doubtful they just unboxed, plugged in, and it connected to the right AP and went.
        • Citizen_Lame 6 hours ago
          ToS can't trump the actual law.
          • advisedwang 1 hour ago
            Ok, but it can collect consent
          • preg_match 3 hours ago
            The actual law is typically so weak and spineless that the ToS doesn't need to trump it. Particularly when it comes to data security or privacy.
      • nicbou 3 hours ago
        It's not allowed in the EU. Not without consent.
      • black6 5 hours ago
        It's implied consent when you give it access to your WiFi.

        Why you would give a coffee maker access to your WiFi is the real question,

        • pfannkuchen 5 hours ago
          So in other words, they were asking for it?
          • K0balt 3 hours ago
            Well, yeah sorta since the only reason appliances connect to the internet is to steal data. I mean, if you buy a connected x that normally would not be connected, it’s 99 percent there to do nefarious stuff for its real owners. It’s like having a pet lion. Sure, it’s horribly irresponsible that someone sold you a pet lion, but. Uuuh you bought at pet lion. What did you think it was going to do?

            Besides, did you see how he was dressed?

    • AnimalMuppet 8 hours ago
      To me, this is begging for a class-action lawsuit.

      Yeah, sure, the terms of service probably say that they can do that. That's still in "unconscionable" territory. And courts do not like unconscionable contracts. If it's unconscionable, it's invalid (if I understand the law correctly).

      Is this why everybody wants to make appliances with wireless?

      • altairprime 8 hours ago
        Yes, this is why everybody wants to make vehicles and refrigerators and thermostats and ereaders with cellular and/or wireless: subscription revenue from bulk data purchasers of what their scans reveal. IIRC Amazon was an industry leader in this space by showing book authors what page you stopped reading on, and then bulk assessing that data at scale to estimate which sentence or word; of course, Google’s Android remains the most successful at-scale deployment of data collection for advertisers worldwide. See also, for recent context, the top comment (and others) of the LG Smart TV problem (30 days ago, 1012 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49592375
      • kotaKat 7 hours ago
        Funny thing, that. Go into an electronics store now and pay attention to the TV boxes and the printer boxes. The amount of crazy fine print on both of them now is absurd. The printer boxes all now have lots of fine print about the various ink protection and DRM schemes and subscription services, the TV boxes have everything ranging from binding arbitration on the box (LG) to "(brand) accounts are REQUIRED to use this TV" (Visio).

        Customers are gonna get lost in the sauce and skip right past all of that and toss the packaging.

    • rasz 6 hours ago
      > as Keurig notes, it’s collecting data about your household in order to let Keurig sell it to advertisers.

      its LGs glass in LG household, and now Keurigs kitchen

    • lazide 10 hours ago
      #1 - why? #2 - oh, because fucking yikes.
  • landgenoot 1 hour ago
    Never assume malicious intent when incompetence.

    I have multiple devices that queries their update server every 15 seconds, which all shows up as the top 10 queried domain in my network.

  • jason_s 20 minutes ago
    `C0FFEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE...`
  • ck2 11 hours ago
    it took me a month to notice my Midea A/C was absolutely hammering my router

    I didn't even know it had wifi capability but it was trying to connect

    I use mac whitelist so it wasn't even getting in but that didn't stop it from trying every seond

    Fortunately it was just a usb dongle so yanked it out

    • altairprime 9 hours ago
      Most Midea units can be swapped for an ESPhome USB dongle if you ever wish to have remote control on your own terms — note various countries’ shop links, and the various wiki and other outlines for DIY etc: https://smlight.tech/product/slwf-01
    • HankB99 7 hours ago
      Ooo. I have a Midea dehumidifier. When it powers up it displays the WiFi symbol. I wonder if it is hammering away at my access point. Might it be better to bring it on line and then just block all traffic?

      And I wonder how I would even tell if it was trying to associate with my WiFi.

    • ars 11 hours ago
      I have two of them, and I just checked and both are quiet. Mine don't connect to WiFi unless you go through an entire process first with an android phone and Matter.

      It's great having them on WiFi - you can turn on the AC before getting home to pre-cool, without having to leave it on all day.

      • sillyfluke 9 hours ago
        Boy: So, how it get this bad grandpa?

        Man: Well, before you couldn't turn on the AC before you got home

        • ars 9 hours ago
          Realistically people would just leave their AC on. So this saves energy, rather than changing comfort.
          • Cpoll 8 hours ago
            Realistically ACs have timers, so you're really only optimizing for days where you go off-schedule.
          • sillyfluke 6 hours ago
            I have a friend who diy'ed a button on single webpage that he presses on his phone while at work in order to open the gate to the building that he lives so delivery people can get in. I also think Bret Victor diy'ed the AC as mentioned while he was a student quarter century or more ago[0]

            I know this sounds like the famous "just do it this way in linux instead" criticism of Dropbox back in the day. But I do think we reached "life parodies fiction" with these smart devices where it makes sense to give diy another go. And with AI, there's less excuses this time around I would imagine.

            But I would literally rather buy a cheap phone, a cheap SIM, hotspot it and connect it to a charger and have the AC connect to that and isolate it that way instead of letting it touch the network.

            [0] https://worrydream.com/Electronics/

            • ttytty 6 hours ago
              You can (and should) just segregate your network to have separate paths for IoT/"smart devices" and normal personal/family devices. Makes it all worry free and transparently observable.

              I have my IoT on a separate VLAN and I can observe communications for any given device at any given time.. this seems like a much saner solution than outright not buying any IoT devices, though that is also a respectable decision!

  • tamimio 10 hours ago
    Reminds me when couple years ago I plugged the TV to the internet (so my relatives kids can watch YT) and I forgot to unplug it for almost a week after, only to find the router dns resolved (and blocked) a million queries, all from that one TV!
    • bombcar 4 hours ago
      I love when it keeps checking some random DNS address, because who knows, with a TTL of 64000 it may just have changed in the last seven milliseconds!
    • altairprime 10 hours ago
      The traffic generated here is network scans, not external traffic, and so blocking DNS wouldn’t have helped.
  • matteoraso 8 hours ago
    I honestly hate the IoT so much. Why should a coffee machine of all things use data? Just make the coffee.
  • ButlerianJihad 8 hours ago
    A year or two ago, I was using NextDNS in ad-blocking and logging mode, which very helpfully exposed malware sitting on my very router, which had been completely undetectable, except for the veritable flood of bizarre DNS queries it was routinely sending to the self-configured DNS servers.

    Now that I have a new router and I've re-enabled NextDNS, I've ironically discovered that the chief abuser of DNS right now is the router's own legit security software, which is absolutely hammering on the same query, several times a second.

    Of course, since I am currently on NextDNS free tier, this matters a lot, because they cut you off after about 300,000 queries in a month. So any hammering abuse will make me lose my privileges much earlier than I would otherwise. So, to stop the abuse, should I shut off my legit security software? It is absolutely rubbish at identifying malware on the device itself...

  • ButlerianJihad 1 hour ago
    Last year I had a big dispute with my ISP that was refusing to support or provide proper WiFi on their router, even while they touted a trademarked brand-name to do it. I ended up turning their router into Bridge Mode and purchasing a real router that could do WiFi. I did this extremely reluctantly, because every other personally-owned router had contracted malware.

    After installing the new router (Netgear) my HP LaserJet began printing error pages. Like, I had done nothing to send anything to it, but a blank error page or three would pop out of it at very random times.

    It took awhile to narrow down and diagnose this. But it turned out that the Netgear system had a very... proactive network malware detection system. It was red-team scanning my LAN for "vulnerabilities" or exploits or the presence of malware (I think just known vulns). It was a known side-effect of these scans, where it would tickle an RTSP TCP port of some kind and the HP printer would respond with its error printout.

    I was so livid that the router was scanning the LAN, basically unbidden and completely undocumented. Even worse, they were not sharing the logs or results of that scan with the consumer. No, they were being sent back to the Netgear mothership, and their cybersecurity vendor overlords. So the scans were not designed to benefit me; they were simply designed to spy on everyone from a privileged vantage point. Now I ask you, why is a piece of kit that is supposed to be "yours" compiling secrets about your network, hiding them from you, and turning them over to, I guess a big database for hackers to leak in due time? This is not a question of "well, devices hooked up to a network should not be vulnerable" if the devices were contained in a private network, and 100% inaccessible from outside, and only attackers inside my perimeter could do these exploits in the first place.

    Thankfully I found a way to disable this. Their "security" shitware is still spamming DNS and I may be forced to disable that as well. Meanwhile, routers 100% cannot self-introspect or self-diagnose and find their own malware. I've said it once; I'll say it again: consumer routers are the Achilles Heel to your network. They are ideal points of compromise for any actor to gain a foothold and pivot, or simply gain persistence undetected. Your ISP doesn't care, and your vendors don't care. Perhaps you should.

  • rendall 9 hours ago
    The GDPR consent form on this blog did not have a “Reject all” button. It required me to manually reject 16 instances of “legitimate interest,” then scroll through 1,746 vendors to make sure they were all set to reject.

    Seems worth mentioning in a post about excessive and intrusive collection of user data. The moral outrage rings hollow when opting out of tracking is so deliberately onerous.

    • wafflemaker 8 hours ago
      And also illegal. It's illegal not to have one button. Companies didn't do it because they suddenly stopped being scum.
  • ttytty 7 hours ago
    [dead]