• 0 Posts
  • 6 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: March 21st, 2024

help-circle


  • Part of the reason why I take good care of my little 24" dumb TV. It’s on the lower end (poor viewing angles, absolutely no adjustment on the legs) but I still have a use for it, so I won’t be replacing it.

    The other concern I have with smart TVs is because manufacturers basically install a smartphone SoC, the TV’s lifecycle is now the same as a smartphone. Most people probably won’t connect a new smart TV box to their discontinued, laggy (thanks to bloated apps) smart TV, the completely functional unit just gets replaced.

    We need regulation to be able to unlock these devices and make available the firmware drivers so that after the manufacturer stops support, the community can continue it (and obviously for us hackers, we would strip the system of all telemetry)



  • Well that’s certainly no light read - I’ll admit that I’ve only read the first six sections of the document for now

    The crux of it that I could see was the initial repo that was backdoored contained a malicious Windows command in the PreBuildCommand field of .vbproj file

    My initial thoughts would be that it might be advisable for build tools to confirm any defined build commands with the user when it detects a command not seen before?

    I suppose otherwise the argument could be made that if you’re downloading and compiling code that is backdoored, if you’re not checking .vbproj or equivalents, you’re probably also not auditing any source code either and you’re being pwned either way.