Is the CIA listening to you thru your Samsung TV?

[Magical Realist]

"A DATA DUMP from WikiLeaks says the CIA can spy on you through your internet-connected Samsung television, which means government spies could know a lot more about you than whether you love Girls.

Earlier today, WikiLeaks released a trove of documents describing what it calls secret spying and hacking tools developed by the CIA and British intelligence. They include a Fake Off mode inserted into Samsung televisions. If activated, it makes the television appear to be off but keeps the power running so spies can capture audio and possibly video of anything in the room. Samsung has not yet responded to our request for comment.

It must be noted that the hack, codenamed Weeping Angel (a Doctor Who reference, by the way) applies only to Samsung televisions from 2012 and 2013 that feature outdated firmware versions 1111, 1112, and 1116. The exploit almost certainly impacts relatively few people, and there may be an easy way to tell if you’ve been hacked—Fake Off mode, as outlined in the 2014 document, leaves a blue LED on the back of the set illuminated.

Now, the CIA probably created this hack to target specific individuals, and it appears the hack can be loaded onto a television only via a USB firmware update that was recently disabled. So unless you’re a known operative, it’s unlikely the government compromised your TV. But we’re sure you’re still curious, so here’s how to tell if it’s happening:

The Telltale LED
In Fake Off mode, the screen appears off and the LEDs on the front of the set change color and dim, as you’d expect if you’d turned off your TV. Yet the TV remains powered and capable of recording conversations. Want to know if Big Brother is listening in? Look at the back of your set. The blue LED back there should be off. It remains illuminated in Fake Off mode, according to the documents WikiLeaks released.

Which TVs?
If you’ve got a Samsung from 2012 or 2013, check to see if you’ve got one of these models: From 2012: UNES8000F, E8000GF plasma, and UNES7550F. From 2013: UNF8000 series, F8500 plasma, UNF7500 series, and UNF7000 series. To determine your firmware version and to update it, go to the main menu, select Support, then select Software Update.

It is possible the CIA has updated Fake Off mode to address the telltale LED, and it’s possible Samsung changed the LED on subsequent models. But the company acknowledged in 2015 that hackers could compromise the voice-control feature in some sets, and it took steps at the time to patch the problem.

Be Seeing You
The companies making internet-connected smart televisions have drawn criticism for collecting and sharing user data. If you want effective protection from unscrupulous companies, shifty hackers, and government spies, simply disconnect your TV from the internet. But if you remain worried, there’s only one sure-fire method for preventing that: unplug the TV."---https://www.wired.com/2017/03/worried-ci...eres-tell/

[C C]

The Sony television pregnability was known before the Wikileak release (most conscious counter-spy circles were already aware of it, as well the few members of the public fixated on rare news about technology). But other information in the dump likely is detrimental to CIA methods and procedures. The bottom line for people in general is that the legion of household items (including Amazon Echo and Google Home) connected to the internet (refrigerators, washing machines, automobiles, lights, etc) are hack-able. So the true lazy idiots to blame are us for wanting these unnecessary toy enhancements.

Even if Wikileaks founder Julian Assange didn't originally have a preferential, anti-West agenda before his having to be holed-up in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London, then a past chain of personal grudges like the latter certainly assured it.

He hosted a TV show on the Russia Today network (now called RT), which is a propaganda machine of Putin's. (Thus the hilariousness of him stating that, along with Al Jazeera, it lacks a national, cultural or regional political agenda compared to the others).

Donald Trump once praised Assange and proclaimed that "I love WikiLeaks," at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania back in October. Now he's faced with the dilemma of either choosing justice for the CIA or continuing to ignore the damage Assange has done to Trump's varioius "enemies" on the latter's home turf (including Hillary Clinton, past-wise).

In an interview back in 2012, Assange openly stated that Wikileaks' major confrontation was with the Western establishment, and that it was the Russian and Middle Eastern news agencies which had been supportive. Though Chinese promotional self-interests are not mentioned, China has largely enjoyed immunity too (i.e., not on the major receiving end of Wikileak revelations).

- - - - - - - -

JULIAN ASSANGE: [...] There are many, many fine exceptions but when we look at international networks there’s really only two that are worth speaking about, and that’s RT and Al Jazeera. The other international networks, as far as WikiLeaks issues are concerned, are too busy considering their own national agenda.

Now, if WikiLeaks had been producing voluminous material about Russia, perhaps that situation would be different. But in the case that we are in at the moment, our major confrontation is with the West, although we have published material for many countries.

RT is a natural partner to produce our material. Also the same about Al Jazeera but RT had greater penetration into the United States. --Assange: I’ll be called a traitor, interviewing radicals [on "The World Tomorrow" on Russia Today] ... interview ... rt.com news ... Apr 16, 2012

[stryder]

I wouldn't be surprised if most of the data dump is literally the sort of stuff you get out of a think tank.  Security analysts literally spend their days hypothesising attack vectors and occasionally run a proof of concept.  Just because some data is outputted about Attack vectors it doesn't necessarily mean that it's being utilised out in the wild (at least it wasn't until it's brought to the light of "freelance" analysts that take it to the next level)

In my greyish rogue days (2.6G et al) we had many such conversation both online and in the real world, but our concerns were about patching security before the flaws could be misused even if what we put forwards would could not necessarily be exploited.  The problem is that to learn how to fix the problems, sometimes you have to test that it works and this is where it becomes a problem since it means breaking a law to fix it.  (This is where "Letters of Marque" should be available to Cybergroups)

[C C]

I wouldn't be surprised if most of the data dump is literally the sort of stuff you get out of a think tank. Security analysts literally spend their days hypothesising attack vectors and occasionally run a proof of concept. Just because some data is outputted about Attack vectors it doesn't necessarily mean that it's being utilised out in the wild (at least it wasn't until it's brought to the light of "freelance" analysts that take it to the next level)

I'm surprised they're not taking the misinformation route of dealing with predatory data organizations. Or maybe this is that very thing: Act as if it wasn't a deliberate covert leak, put on a show of being publicly outraged about it, while all the time smirking that Wikileaks' latest episode of hunger has been appeased with cards that are "no longer viable, anyway" and "never intended to be played to begin with".

But given how disorganized Trump's administration has been, with many positions still not filled after weeks (he's got a board of glowing buttons for pressing which actually don't connect to anything, since Obama left)... It would be a tad difficult to believe such was orchestrated unless planned, commissioned, and scheduled before he took office. The latter all the more likely since (bizarrely) the CIA and the POTUS are hardly friends or allies.

[RainbowUnicorn]

I wouldn't be surprised if most of the data dump is literally the sort of stuff you get out of a think tank.  Security analysts literally spend their days hypothesising attack vectors and occasionally run a proof of concept.  Just because some data is outputted about Attack vectors it doesn't necessarily mean that it's being utilised out in the wild (at least it wasn't until it's brought to the light of "freelance" analysts that take it to the next level)

In my greyish rogue days (2.6G et al) we had many such conversation both online and in the real world, but our concerns were about patching security before the flaws could be misused even if what we put forwards would could not necessarily be exploited.  The problem is that to learn how to fix the problems, sometimes you have to test that it works and this is where it becomes a problem since it means breaking a law to fix it.  (This is where "Letters of Marque" should be available to Cybergroups)

the grande-standing to demonise whistler blowers seems to be handing a great deal of energy to those who would intend harm to society.
how does that saying go...? "when good people do nothing" i thought WWII had taught the west that lesson already