• DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    You’re all missing the real kicker here - this sign is only here for the HIPAA auditor. Everyone knows that no one is actually going to mute the thing.

    • TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Also muting it probably doesn’t stop it listening, it just stops its response.

      • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        No, there is a button to make the Echo stop listening.

        If you want to prove me wrong, it should be incredibly easy to press the button and record the Echos network activity. If you’re right you’d still see network traffic. But nobody has been able to show this so far. I wonder why?

        • Billegh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          I’m not sure that’s the case. We have one at work and if it thinks you’re calling out to it repeatedly it will say out loud that its mic is off and that you have to enable it.

          It might just be the part that listens for “Alexa” but that audio buffer is available to the device and it can do things with it.

        • TWeaK@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Yeah I read the other comments after making mine. However everyone keeps calling it a “physical” button, and I don’t think that’s accurate. It won’t be a physical switch that opens a circuit, it will be a button that operates a transistor that opens the circuit.

          Still, I see no good reason to trust the device - especially in a medical setting.

          • calcopiritus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            There’s not much difference between a direct switch and a transistor, both will cut the signal and neither is over rideable by software

            • Piranha Phish@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 years ago

              This is disingenuous at best and incorrect at worst. The mute button on the Echo is just that, a button; it is not a switch. It is software-controlled and pushing it just sends a signal to the microcontroller to take some action. For instance, one action is to turn on the red indicator light; that’s definitely not physically connected to the mute button.

              Maybe another response of pushing the button is to disable the transistor used for the microphone, but it’s more likely that it just sets a software flag for the algorithm to stop its processing of the microphone input signal. Regardless of which method it uses, the microcontroller could undoubtedly just decide to revert that and listen in, either disabling or not disabling the red light at the same time.

              But I personally don’t think it listens in when muted. I don’t think it spies on us to target ads based on what we say around it. I’m not worried that the mic mute function doesn’t work as intended.

              But I fully understand that it is fully capable of it, technically speaking.

              • calcopiritus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 years ago

                I don’t know the internal workings of the echo, I was responding to a comment that said it “operates a transistor”. Which is way different than it being an input to a microcontroller.

                If the button is just connected to a transistor, it’s not software controllable, since transistors are electronical devices that don’t interpret any software. A microcontroller does execute software. There’s a big difference.

            • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              A transistor is controlled by software so yes, it’s absolutely over rideable.

              • calcopiritus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 years ago

                Transistors are simple electronical devices. They don’t run software. You can control their inputs with another device (such a microcontroller) that does run software. You can also control their inputs with a button. You can’t control their output with software.

                I don’t know how an Amazon echo is wired up, but if you just have a button connected to the gate of the transistor, it works basically the same as a mechanical switch.

                • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  Transistors are simple electronical devices. They don’t run software.

                  No, as I just said in the comment you replied to, it’s backwards. Software controls transistors.

                  The important difference is that a mechanical switch cannot be maliciously switched on by software. It has to be done physically and intentionally.

                  • calcopiritus@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    2 years ago

                    Transistors have no registers. They have no arithmetic logical units. They have nothing. They are so simple they can be made up of less than 100 atoms. Transistors have to be connected electrically to other device. Any reverse engineer can trace what it is connected to and it’s behaviour cannot be programmed. If you know that it’s a transistor and you know the inputs, you can know the output. The same cannot be said for a device which runs software, you’d have to additionally know what that software does, which is incredibly more complicated.

                    Software is ran by microcontrollers. Transistors can be connected to microcontrollers. But they can also be connected to buttons. If there is no microcontroller, there is no software.

        • CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          If the Echo stored the audio and then sent it sometime after you unmute, it would still pass your test.

          • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            Which you could easily see by looking at the amount of traffic sent after unmuting, unless you believe that Amazon secretly found an infinite compression algorithm they use only in muted Echo devices.

              • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 years ago

                Again: Which you could easily see by looking at the amount of traffic sent after unmuting, unless you believe that Amazon secretly found an infinite compression algorithm they use only in muted Echo devices.

                You understand that sending more information means more traffic? Unless - as I stated - they found a perfect compression algorithm, you’d be able to tell.