Latest topics
» Petition to eliminate the Senior Executive Service
Today at 2:48 am by Serena1

Yesterday at 11:30 pm by robert18

» #QANON Katie and LadyDragon discuss her injustice and new Q posts @potus
Yesterday at 8:17 pm by LadyDragon

» Bright fireball recorded over São Paulo, Brazil
Yesterday at 8:10 pm by PurpleSkyz

» Executive Order: Military Tribunals for PedoGate VIPs | David Zublick
Yesterday at 6:20 pm by PurpleSkyz

» 2018-03-18 Connecting Consciousness - Simon Parkes March II
Yesterday at 6:17 pm by PurpleSkyz

» The GoldFIsh Report No. 204 & 206
Yesterday at 6:12 pm by PurpleSkyz

» Dane Wigington and Prof. Paul Beck with Host Geoff Brady - Geoengineering Watch Global Alert News
Yesterday at 12:56 pm by Consciousness Of Economic

» Russia's gold rush continues, with reserves at all-time high
Yesterday at 12:55 pm by Consciousness Of Economic

» Trump to announce anti-opioid plan with death penalty for dealers
Yesterday at 12:53 pm by Consciousness Of Economic

» Canal completely drained after huge 100ft wide sinkhole opens up just feet from a boat in Cheshire, UK
Yesterday at 12:20 pm by PurpleSkyz

» UPDATE - CREEPY Voicemail Message Is "Shaking" The Internet
Yesterday at 11:45 am by PurpleSkyz

» Fastwalker
Yesterday at 11:00 am by PurpleSkyz

» Fundamentals 2&3: Are You a Citizen? By Anna Von Reitz
Yesterday at 10:57 am by PurpleSkyz

» I AM by Ines Radman
Yesterday at 10:55 am by PurpleSkyz

» Values… by Visionkeeper
Yesterday at 10:53 am by PurpleSkyz

» The Game 2.-
Yesterday at 10:52 am by PurpleSkyz

» Benjamin Fulford 3-19-18
Yesterday at 10:49 am by PurpleSkyz

» Glasses come to the fullness with Light
Yesterday at 10:48 am by PurpleSkyz

» UFO News ~ Triangular UFO photographed by an airplane passenger over Texas plus MORE
Yesterday at 10:44 am by PurpleSkyz

Yesterday at 10:35 am by PurpleSkyz

» What is religion? Fake news? - David Icke
Yesterday at 10:09 am by PurpleSkyz

You are not connected. Please login or register

Out Of Mind » THE INSANITY OF REALITY » GOVERNMENT & THE NEW WORLD ORDER » Samsung Warns Customers To Think Twice About What They Say Near Smart TVs

Samsung Warns Customers To Think Twice About What They Say Near Smart TVs

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]



Samsung Warns Customers To Think Twice About What They Say Near Smart TVs

 Sun 4:10 pm UTC, 14 Feb 2016  
posted by Gordon

February 13, 2016 By Jake Anderson
In a troubling new development in the domestic consumer surveillance debate, an investigation into Samsung Smart TVs has revealed that user voice commands are recorded, stored, and transmitted to a third party. The company even warns customers not to discuss personal or sensitive information within earshot of the device.
This is in stark contrast to previous claims by tech manufacturers, like PlayStation, who vehemently deny their devices record personal information, despite evidence to the contrary, including news that hackers can gain access to unencrypted streams of credit card information.
The new Samsung controversy stems from the discovery of a single haunting statement in the company’s “privacy policy,” which states:
Please be aware that if your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party.
This sparked a back and forth between the Daily Beast and Samsung regarding not only consumer privacy but also security concerns. If our conversations are “captured and transmitted,” eavesdropping hackers may be able to use our “personal or other sensitive information” for identity theft or any number of nefarious purposes.
There is also the concern that such information could be turned over to law enforcement or government agencies. With the revelation of the PRISM program — by which the NSA collected data from Microsoft, Google, and Facebook — and other such NSA spying programs, neither the government nor the private sector has the benefit of the doubt in claiming tech companies are not conscripted into divulging sensitive consumer info under the auspices of national security.
Michael Price, counsel in the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at the NYU School of Law, stated:
I do not doubt that this data is important to providing customized content and convenience, but it is also incredibly personal, constitutionally protected information that should not be for sale to advertisers and should require a warrant for law enforcement to access.
Responding to the controversy, Samsung updated its privacy policy, named its third party partner, and issued the following statement:
Voice recognition, which allows the user to control the TV using voice commands, is a Samsung Smart TV feature, which can be activated or deactivated by the user. The TV owner can also disconnect the TV from the Wi-Fi network.
Under still more pressure, Samsung named its third-party affiliate, Nuance Communications. In a statement to Anti-Media, Nuance said:
Samsung is a Nuance customer. The data that Nuance collects is speech data. Nuance respects the privacy of its users in its use of speech data. Our use of such data is for the development and improvement of our voice recognition and natural language understanding technologies. As outlined in our privacy policy, third parties work under contract with Nuance, pursuant to confidentiality agreements, to help Nuance tailor and deliver the speech recognition and natural language service, and to help Nuance develop, tune, enhance, and improve its products and services.
We do not sell that speech data for marketing or advertising. Nuance does not have a relationship with government agencies to turn over consumer data…..There is no intention to trace these samples to specific people or users.
Nuance’s Wikipedia page mentions that the company maintains a small division for government and military system development, but that is not confirmed at this time.
Despite protestations from these companies that our voice command data is not being traced to specific users or, worse, stored for use by government or law enforcement agencies, it seems that when it comes to constitutional civil liberties, the end zone keeps getting pushed further and further down the field.
For years, technologists and smart device enthusiasts claimed webcam and voice recording devices did not store our information. While Samsung may be telling the truth about the use of that data, there are countless companies integrating smart technology who may not be using proper encryption methods and may have varying contractual obligations to government or law enforcement.
Is it really safe for us to assume that the now exceedingly evident symbiotic relationship between multinational corporations and government agencies does not still include a revolving door for the sharing of sensitive consumer data?
This article (Samsung Warns Customers To Think Twice About What They Say Near Smart TVs) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Jake Anderson and Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email

Thanks to:


Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum