SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the how-do-you-put-a-tinfoil-hat-on-an-antenna? dept.
BBC News is reporting that Smart TVs subverted by radio attack. The attack uses the Hybrid Broadcast Broadband TV (HbbTV) standard that is widely supported in smart television sets sold in Europe. The HbbTV system was designed to help broadcasters exploit the internet connection of a smart TV to add extra information to programmes or so advertisers can do a better job of targeting viewers. The story goes on to note:
The attack exploits loopholes in widely used technology that helps smart TVs receive tailored adverts. Once hijacked, the TVs could be made to send messages on behalf of attackers, find other vulnerable devices in a home or launch other attacks across the net. Detecting and stopping the attack would be difficult, said the researchers.
This could be used in a wide-spread attack to subvert hundreds or even thousands of Smart TVs at once. If a user had logged into Facebook on their TV, one could use this attack to make Facebook posts on the target's behalf.
Though not mentioned in the article, I would think one could use a very directional antenna and target a specific location or TV.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Monday June 09 2014, @02:16PM
Built in speakers, but ones you can completely turn off if you use an external amp. Dolby Digital output of what is on the screen (so cycling between HDMI4,5 and 6 correctly changes audio output). Ability to underscan the TV to show the full frame, and a field-rate output
I would pay $100 extra to avoid the "smart tv" rubbish, but on the other hand I want more than just a monitor.
(Score: 1) by xorsyst on Monday June 09 2014, @02:29PM
And a remote control for volume and input selection?
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Monday June 09 2014, @02:39PM
Perhaps. But then that's where it gets interesting, In years gone by a control din switch (GPI, 9 pin RS232, etc) would be good, but now that's where having an IP port to allow control from a proper system comes into it's own. But then you're going down the "hackable" route.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 09 2014, @02:40PM
Of course not. Jeezus.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday June 09 2014, @02:59PM
You can do it for $80 not $100 without trying very hard at Amazon.
The OSD for input switching for my TV exists, but only has 3 inputs, sucks, is incredibly high latency (like 20-30 secs from TV power on to the OSD screen), and slow response when you switch. For $40 shipped free with prime you can get a switchbox that kicks butt with 5 inputs, nearly instant switch and nearly zero latency. Its about 100000x better than the cruddy built in switching interface on my TV. You'll also need a short HDMI cable which Best Buy would sell for $75 to $100 but amazon basics will sell for like $3.
Next you wanted a little box with hdmi in and power in on one side, and hdmi out and optical spdif and RCA audio out on the other side. Again, $40 at amazon and free shipping with prime. I use my TV to extract my optical spdif and it works fine although I did search on amazon for this box and they do certainly exist. With a little edid switch to lie to the upstream about having 2ch or 5.1ch sound destination.
Note that there's a lot or supply/demand pricing and perceived value pricing. So an engineer would assume a TV will be at least $200 more than a monitor due to system complexity and patents, but when you're marking prices up 500% anyway, "people won't pay as much for a TV as a monitor" so the TV might actually be cheaper than the monitor. Just don't get ripped off by purchasing a 720 tv instead of a 1080 monitor in the same size. I'll probably never be able to buy a high res 1600x1200 monitor again, but you used to be able to buy really high res monitors in the good old days. Not any more, which is too bad.
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Wednesday June 11 2014, @02:35AM
Yeah, ain't that a pain. 4K should be nice though, first step forward in resolution since the days of CRTs!