Samsung announces Smart TV to PC 'Remote Access'

[HEXUS]

2019 lineup of Smart TVs will use VMware Horizon and connect with keyboard / mouse.

Read more.

[Tabbykatze]

If it were a close to bones RDP replicator so i could use the TV has a remote screen and keyboard to my desktop somewhere else in the house, that would be a win.

It means i could get rid of hacky solutions, steam link etc.

But to be an application extender or a thin client type system, that's a bit of a limiting factor...

[Saracen999]

With any such connectivity, security is very important and Samsung has integrated its proprietary Knox security technology into its Remote Access features to help make it as secure as possible

"As possible". Well, that's reassuring. Not. It's vague enough to be meaningless.

My method of getting that link as secure "as possible" is to not have such a link at all.

I assume in order for that link to be created, the user has to explicitly set it up? If not, for me, it's a good reason not to buy a TV with that feature in the first place, because it represents one more, and for me utterly unnecessary attack surface.

Oh, aand setting up that link better only be possible via a local user and tge remote, and better be behind a PIN-locked part of the interface.

I can see why some users, like Tabby, might see an appeal but it's a function I have zero need for, absolutely no desire for, and to me represents all downside, no upside.

Given the above, if Samsung were to present two models of a specific TV, differentiated only by one and only one having this feature, I'll buy the one without, just like I do not want wifi built-in to my TV.

[nobodyspecial]

Build an HTPC...Nuff said? Cloud=retarded unless you WANT everyone to have your data. Jeez, facebook, google, govt (DNC servers, Hillary etc etc, GAO lost millions of security clearance people's data! SS#'s, fingerprints, all personal data background check info, friends, spouse info etc, jeez it was bad), etc can't keep ANYONE out, why the heck would you put your data in the cloud? Also, ANYTHING important shouldn't even be exposed to the internet. I'm looking at you Lockheed, Boeing, Northrop etc! All govt contractors should be REQUIRED to keep certain stuff OFF the net, period or be massively fined and lost ALL contracts in the future. PERIOD. If it's important, for the love of god, REMOVE IT FROM ALL INTERNET ACCESS! Freaking govt morons. We routinely yanked nics from pc's just to kill access for some stuff, blocked all flash drives, killed or removed cd/dvd drives etc. Sound tough? Nothing gets stolen then unless you are AT the PC and have time to hack before we catch you, which if you do your job correctly, shouldn't even be an issue in that case (lock your crap down!). Too bad real IT admins are in such short supply & too many paper certs around these days. You should be fired for being hacked, and put to death for getting hacked in govt IT That would change paper people to real certs in short order IMHO China has already said they feel hacking your data is needed for their future, so I hope you remove anything important from the net Why innovate if you don't protect it? Samsung to have access to your data? China anyone?

Samsung (and everyone else, see link below) already sends your data home via syncplus if you don't stop it. Your viewing habits etc sold to the highest bidder Cloud is useful for netflix type data (nothing important really...LOL), but not your personal INFO, or plans for the next great invention
https://www.consumerreports.org/privacy/how-to-turn-off-smart-tv-snooping-features/
Wake up people How to turn the crap off on most tv's. Merry Christmas & Happy New Year.

[Tabbykatze]

And so the anti china racist makes his way to this post as well...

[Saracen999]

And so the anti china racist makes his way to this post as well...

Not suggesting that refers go me (I hope) but .....well, a number of western governments and authorities have already announced they're removing hardware made by certain Chinese companies (Huawei) from core infratructure because of security "concerns", including (IIRC) BT, emergency services infrastructure and the Austrslian government.

A large part of Trump's trade spat with China is over recognising, respecting and enforcing IP rights, and there's no denying that a huge amount of fake goods comes out of China.

Oh, and last time I looked, Samsung were Taiwanese which, racially, has direct ties to China are certainly not China's polutical soulmates.

Personally, none of that is what motivates my choices, but when Samsung have already been caught sending user data "home" in the past. Fool me once shame on you, Samsung, but fool me twice .... shame on me.

Do I trust Samsung? No.

Why? Two reasons - past guilt, and .... they're a nig corp.

Is any of that racial? No, because Google, MS and just every every other company that can, data mines it's customers and they ain't all Chinese, Taiwanese or even generally Asian, by a VERY large margin. US companies were at it albeit in a far more primitive manner, decades ago, before PC's were a glint in Bill Gates eye, and China was still Maoist.


The simple fact is there is an ideological gulf between how China (as in the state) sees geopolitics and how the West does. That doesn't mean they're enemies, but it does suggest a healthy degree of caution, especially in government procurement and core infrastructure, and even more so when China doesn't open up internal markets to the West jn the way it takes advantage of Western market openness.

As for me, all that's above my pay grade. I just don't want ANYBODY accessing my personall data, whether it be as apparently innocuous as location data or browsing habits, let alone key financial or medical files on my network, and ANYTHING that opens a potential doorway to that, unless I get some very significant benefit, is a non-starter for me.

[Tabbykatze]

It was not directed at you, i see you have the name Saracen999, are you the original Saracen?

If so, i actually do respect your opinion even though i do feel some of your reasoning and methods to workaround are ridiculous and outlandish.

No, it was directed nobodyspecial who consistently drivels this trash.

As of yet, there has been no evidence that Huawei equipment has magic backdoors that china can access. Top Cybersecs in Germany actually publicly asked the question "who actually has any evidence?". At this time, there is none.

I don't deny China is pretty bad with IP rights but that is not the reason America is doing its trade war. Trump is trying to make it uneconomical to use China so manufacturers will create local plants and keep them on the top of the economy foodchain. At least for a high level layman anyway.

[peterb]

As of yet, there has been no published evidence that Huawei equipment has magic backdoors that china can access. Top Cybersecs in Germany actually publicly asked the question "who actually has any evidence?". At this time, there is none in the public domain.

I have (obviously) added the bits in bold - the evidence may exist, but not published for security reasons. But if BT are going to the expense of replacing their Huawei equipment, it isn't just on a whim. I know that the MoD refused to route any of their (encrypted) data over any BT network that contained certain mfrs equipment.

[Tabbykatze]

I have (obviously) added the bits in bold - the evidence may exist, but not published for security reasons. But if BT are going to the expense of replacing their Huawei equipment, it isn't just on a whim. I know that the MoD refused to route any of their (encrypted) data over any BT network that contained certain mfrs equipment.

You say it's not published due to security reasons, yeah I can get a little bit behind that. Or is it because your closest ally is ready to go to war both on trade and "other" reasons and is threatening China in all areas. What better way to stuff China over further than to get the rest of the world to think their major telecommunications business is actually an extension of the Chinese Communist Party.

I am all for removing warranted security risks but lets look at it objectively, if many know that Huawei equipment has been found with backdoors for China which would be absolutely possible to find through reverse engineering the hardware. There are many people worldwide who would be able to do this, both private and state. A secret like that would be leaked very quickly.

However, if you get a few people to write a few articles about possible Chinese equipment backdoors then the natural paranoia and distrust of your opposition would proliferate the lie very quickly and very few people know the truth so the law of secrets means it is unlikely to be leaked.

Interesting breakdown on this: https://phys.org/news/2016-01-equati...ly-reveal.html

In regards to the MoD, they want to validate all ends of the connection, the certain MFRS equipment had not been properly validated so therefore they would pursue routing via alternate systems. Is this because of Chinese hack possibilities or risk mitigation by only going across fully established known equipment?

The moon landings are real, ton of evidence. Chinese backdoors in major networking equipment that is scrutinised to the lowest level when implemented, not much evidence (if at all) to support...

[Saracen999]

It was not directed at you, i see you have the name Saracen999, are you the original Saracen?

If so, i actually do respect your opinion even though i do feel some of your reasoning and methods to workaround are ridiculous and outlandish.

No, it was directed nobodyspecial who consistently drivels this trash.

As of yet, there has been no evidence that Huawei equipment has magic backdoors that china can access. Top Cybersecs in Germany actually publicly asked the question "who actually has any evidence?". At this time, there is none.

I don't deny China is pretty bad with IP rights but that is not the reason America is doing its trade war. Trump is trying to make it uneconomical to use China so manufacturers will create local plants and keep them on the top of the economy foodchain. At least for a high level layman anyway.

Well, if by "outlandish and ridiculous methods and workarounds" you mean my approach to privacy and protecting my own data, well, the wonderful thing about opinions is we're all entitled to them .... at least, those that don't live under certain authoratative regimes.

What might seem ridiculous to you works for me, regardless of whatever anybody else thinks. Personally, I think the cavalier aand reckless attitude towards privacy and data protection that some people is, well, cavalier abd reckless. But then, it's their data and theur privacy to protect, or not, as they wish.

A lot of my 'methods' comes from the point in my life I'm at, and the way I want to live the rest of it. Largely, that puts the emphasis on peace snd quiet. For instance, my attitude to mobile phones ... or rather, smartphones. There is nothjng, at all, a smartphone offers that I actually need. Nothing I cannot manage perfectly well without There are a number of aspects I also definitely don't want, not least, being 'tethered' to the rest of the world by it, 24/7.

If I'm watching a film I don't want a phone ringing. If I'm out with friends, I want to spend my time with those friends, not answering phone calls. And I certainly don't want to be pestered by my bank, insurance company, utility comosny, etc, with "offers".

And so on.

So, I deliberately make it pretty hard for anybody but a very small and select group of family and friends to get hokd of me by phone, though I do make sure that they can.

My point is that what might seem ridiculous to you is sensible and pragmatic to me, becomes it derives directly from where my life is at, what my needs, wants, desires and expectations are, and that's likely very different to you.

For instance, do I need the internet? No.

Do I want it? Ummmm ..... not sure, but while occassional access (which I will retain) is convenient, I'm certainly thinking about dumping broadband. The wife and I were discussing it only a few days ago. I don't have an employer to worry about, and any remaining work I do is sporadic at best, and I'm very selective about it. Also, mostly, even that doesn't involve the internet. I don't bank online (or need to), or shop online (can't remember the last time, but years ago), etc.

I doubt your life, and therefore needs, resembles mine much, and so, what seems ridiculous and outlandish to you works perfectly well for me.

[DanceswithUnix]

There are a number of aspects I also definitely don't want, not least, being 'tethered' to the rest of the world by it, 24/7.

I think that was more of a problem with what are now referred to as "feature" cell phones of old. Mine automatically switches to "alarms only" in the evening so it won't go off unless I ask it to wake me up, switches back to normal mid morning. If I go see a film, I tell it to go "do not disturb" for a timed two or three hours so some time after the film I become contactable again. It sounds like in your case you want to leave the phone always in do not disturb, but whitelist the people you are happy to phone you. These are all standard Android features.

Insurance companies etc only ever phone me if there is a problem, usually once a year when my kit car insurance is due.

I think the only unwanted phone calls I ever get are the ones that start "I hear you've been involved in an accident", and even they seem to be pretty rare these days.

Remote access does sound pretty pointless for a TV, but hopefully it will be in the form of an app that can be installed/uninstalled as required.

[spacein_vader]

Well, if by "outlandish and ridiculous methods and workarounds" you mean my approach to privacy and protecting my own data, well, the wonderful thing about opinions is we're all entitled to them .... at least, those that don't live under certain authoratative regimes.

What might seem ridiculous to you works for me, regardless of whatever anybody else thinks. Personally, I think the cavalier aand reckless attitude towards privacy and data protection that some people is, well, cavalier abd reckless. But then, it's their data and theur privacy to protect, or not, as they wish.

A lot of my 'methods' comes from the point in my life I'm at, and the way I want to live the rest of it. Largely, that puts the emphasis on peace snd quiet. For instance, my attitude to mobile phones ... or rather, smartphones. There is nothjng, at all, a smartphone offers that I actually need. Nothing I cannot manage perfectly well without There are a number of aspects I also definitely don't want, not least, being 'tethered' to the rest of the world by it, 24/7.

If I'm watching a film I don't want a phone ringing. If I'm out with friends, I want to spend my time with those friends, not answering phone calls. And I certainly don't want to be pestered by my bank, insurance company, utility comosny, etc, with "offers".

And so on.

So, I deliberately make it pretty hard for anybody but a very small and select group of family and friends to get hokd of me by phone, though I do make sure that they can.

My point is that what might seem ridiculous to you is sensible and pragmatic to me, becomes it derives directly from where my life is at, what my needs, wants, desires and expectations are, and that's likely very different to you.

For instance, do I need the internet? No.

Do I want it? Ummmm ..... not sure, but while occassional access (which I will retain) is convenient, I'm certainly thinking about dumping broadband. The wife and I were discussing it only a few days ago. I don't have an employer to worry about, and any remaining work I do is sporadic at best, and I'm very selective about it. Also, mostly, even that doesn't involve the internet. I don't bank online (or need to), or shop online (can't remember the last time, but years ago), etc.

I doubt your life, and therefore needs, resembles mine much, and so, what seems ridiculous and outlandish to you works perfectly well for me.

It's the next generation of kids that unfortunately won't have that choice. Their images, birth date and loads of other personal data will have been plastered over the various social networks so often by their proud (and well meaning,) parents that by the time they're old enough to make an informed decision it'll be too late.

[Saracen999]

It's the next generation of kids that unfortunately won't have that choice. Their images, birth date and loads of other personal data will have been plastered over the various social networks so often by their proud (and well meaning,) parents that by the time they're old enough to make an informed decision it'll be too late.

That's one aspect and IMHO an unpleasant one, of what I refer to as the 'genie wnd the bottle" problem of privacy. As far as I'm concerned, and it's why I take such a rigid srance on it, we all get exactly ONE chance to keep data private. Once it's out, it'out permanently, as your example illustrates.

It is, of course, entirely impossible to stay off data warehouses entirely, but the "leakage" is cumulative. So, every bit you can stop leaking is a victory.

This 'battle' is going on, day-in, day-out, 24/7/365, and the only issue is whether people care, or care enough to be proactive about it. I do ....but if someone doesn't, fair enough, that's their right. Just as long as their realise the battle is going on.

[Saracen999]

I think that was more of a problem with what are now referred to as "feature" cell phones of old. Mine automatically switches to "alarms only" in the evening so it won't go off unless I ask it to wake me up, switches back to normal mid morning. If I go see a film, I tell it to go "do not disturb" for a timed two or three hours so some time after the film I become contactable again. It sounds like in your case you want to leave the phone always in do not disturb, but whitelist the people you are happy to phone you. These are all standard Android features.

Insurance companies etc only ever phone me if there is a problem, usually once a year when my kit car insurance is due.

I think the only unwanted phone calls I ever get are the ones that start "I hear you've been involved in an accident", and even they seem to be pretty rare these days.

....

Maybe you're lucky. Maybe I've bern unlucky in the past. I used to get regular calls ftom BT, offering "deals", as a subscriber/customer, despite repeatedly asking them not to mske such cslls, in increasingly irritated terms. Also, from my bank and insurance companies asking if I was aware of "new products"?

Granted, legislation has backed tjus down, a lot, ib this country. For now. But I still gdt pestering calls, even from companies I have instructed, in writing, not to do so.

So, maybe I'm just unlucky or maybe you're lucky. Dunno.

But it is why I spent money on a call-blocker to put a hard stop to it, and again for the mother-in-law, who was being plagued by nuisance calls.

[DanceswithUnix]

But it is why I spent money on a call-blocker to put a hard stop to it, and again for the mother-in-law, who was being plagued by nuisance calls.

Things like blacklisting are pretty easy on a smartphone. I think lack of such facilities as standard on a landline are one of the reasons the younger generation don't do landlines.

I do wonder if some carriers are more targetted than others for nuisance calls. I haven't even had a call from "Windows Support" for ages My wife gets lots more, yet she is probably more careful with handing out her number than I am.

[Saracen999]

Things like blacklisting are pretty easy on a smartphone. I think lack of such facilities as standard on a landline are one of the reasons the younger generation don't do landlines.

I do wonder if some carriers are more targetted than others for nuisance calls. I haven't even had a call from "Windows Support" for ages My wife gets lots more, yet she is probably more careful with handing out her number than I am.

I had a "windows'support" call a few weeks back. My "call blocker" picked it up but I let it through as I was expecting a genuine internationsl call that I wanted to be sure to not miss.

My landline blocker is quite a bit more selective, and programmable, than a blacklist, though. For instance, both blacklist (always block), and whitelist (always pass through, transparently) but the versatility comes with those fitting neither. It selects between different types, (ID blocked, international, and a couple of others) and I can set each to one of several reactions, including :-

- disconnect
- play a "naff orf" message and disconect, or
- play a message requesting identification.

That latter is useful, because a caller must leave a voice message, then gets put on hold whike the blocker calls me. No message left, you get a couple of tries, and then auto-disconnect. If they do provide ID the blocker rings my phone (which until this point is entirely silent) and plays ghe message. Only if I accept the call does the caller get connected to a person. If I reject it, they have no way to know if I rejected it or if I simply wasn''t there.

And of course, trusted callers can be a code that bypasses the blocker, in case they are calling from an unknown number.


Can all thjs be done with a smartphone? Maybe. But that doesn't resolve the point about not wanting calls when I'm out, whrn I'm eating with friends, etc. There is still an expectation, if you have a mobile, that you are available to be contacted, at more or less any time. It's not just whether you are contactable. There is, I swear, something psychologically different about calling a mobile, and calling "home" and a lot (maybe not all) of people somehiw regard having a mobile as permission to call about the most trivial thing. That's what I mean by 'tethered' to it.

Case in point

I wanted to call Peterb about someyhing recently. It was moderately important to me, but hardly so to him. I rang his mobile. Caught him, it turns out, in a very poor reception area (so he had to move) and then, it turns out, on a customer site. Could the call have waited? Sure. But I wasn't even thinking "is this likely to be a good time?"

It was convenient for me, and I had the number so .....

Sorry about that, Peter.


Also, I have a landline. Comes s a bundle with BB, Tv, etc.

I don't (currently) have a mobile. I gave up even on my dumbphone.

So to get a smartphone is going to cost me ....what? Bear in mind, I don't do mail order unless absolutely necessary, and while I would no way buy a high end phone I don't want cheap rubbish either.

Then ....I don't want monthly payments on a contract. Because of other aspects of my lifestyle, I have worked hard to minimise automatic deductions from my bank. Currently, we have exactly ONE between us. We even pay utility bills quarterly in arrears. Would a montjly DD payment on a budget account and/or switching save some money? Sure. Last time I checked, a few months back, less than £40/year. Guess what? I don't care. If it was £400, well, I'd probably change, but for £40, I'd rather do it the way it suits my convenience.

So .. back to smartphone.

Contracts are a non-starter, leaving PAYG. My mobile usage is absolutely minimal, even with the dumbphone. By minimal, I mean my last £10 call credit lasted me, IIRC, about 10 years.

So, even a PAYG contract with £5-£10 monthly top-up (use it or lose it) is a huge waste.

At £5/month (if such exists) I'd be paying £60/year, when I need about £1/year. At £10/month top-up, it's £119 per year, poured down the toilet, and of course.either way, add the cost of the phone itself.

So if I do get one, just what benefits would it give me? Something I need, or want, or would find useful enough to justify that sort of cost?

And of course bear on mind thr lkmitations on app choice that don't risk compromising my location data, contacts data, diary data, photos, and apparently, even chats and private messages, so I'd have to go to huge hassle vetting every single app (and rejecting most) and locking access down hard to prevent abuses.


So, and it's a serious question to see if you or anybody else has a convincing answer .... why, given everything I've said, would I want a smartphone?

Remember as I said to Tabby, I'm not suggesting this stance is for everybody. Merely that what might seem "ridiculous and outlandish" if living how you, Tabby or whoever do, it isn't if you live my life, with my values, choices and priorities.

I'm not even suggesting most people could live as I do even if they wanted to. I'm financially independent, have neither rent not mortgage to worry about, no loans of debts, minimal mandatory expenses and monthly/yearly outlay < income.

One last point.

I'm not some old dude that doesn't understand "tech". I bought my first mobile phone back in the days when networks were analog, and both phones and contracts were expensive. I've also spent much of my time since the early 90's writing for computer and technology magazines, national newspapers (on technology, primarily) and have had extensive worldwide travel and access to development labs, product managers, and senior managers up to and including CEO's of many of the world's largest tech companies.

I'm not a neophyte, or either afraid of or ignorant of technology. Much of my stance on many things comes from insights (or outright knowledge) gained from a degree of access few will ever get.