Woman Says Alexa Device Recorded Her Private Conversation and Sent It To Random Contact; Amazon Confirms the Incident (kiro7.com) 272
Gary Horcher, reporting for KIRO7: A Portland family contacted Amazon to investigate after they say a private conversation in their home was recorded by Amazon's Alexa -- the voice-controlled smart speaker -- and that the recorded audio was sent to the phone of a random person in Seattle, who was in the family's contact list. "My husband and I would joke and say I'd bet these devices are listening to what we're saying," said Danielle, who did not want us to use her last name. Every room in her family home was wired with the Amazon devices to control her home's heat, lights and security system. But Danielle said two weeks ago their love for Alexa changed with an alarming phone call. "The person on the other line said, 'unplug your Alexa devices right now,'" she said. '"You're being hacked.'" That person was one of her husband's employees, calling from Seattle. "We unplugged all of them and he proceeded to tell us that he had received audio files of recordings from inside our house," she said. "At first, my husband was, like, 'no you didn't!' And the (recipient of the message) said 'You sat there talking about hardwood floors.' And we said, 'oh gosh, you really did hear us.'" Danielle listened to the conversation when it was sent back to her, and she couldn't believe someone 176 miles away heard it too. In a statement, an Amazon spokesperson said, "Amazon takes privacy very seriously. We investigated what happened and determined this was an extremely rare occurrence. We are taking steps to avoid this from happening in the future."
Further reading: Amazon Admits Its AI Alexa is Creepily Laughing at People.
Further reading: Amazon Admits Its AI Alexa is Creepily Laughing at People.
LOL (Score:5, Insightful)
"Amazon takes privacy very seriously."
Obviously not.
Re: LOL (Score:4, Funny)
That is why I only use Alexa in my bathroom where I do not typically have private conversations.
Re: LOL (Score:5, Funny)
That is why I only use Alexa in my bathroom where I do not typically have private conversations.
Your health insurance company will be canceling your policy real soon because of . . . "excessive flatulence" . . .
Re: (Score:2)
That is why I only use Alexa in my bathroom where I do not typically have private conversations.
Your health insurance company will be canceling your policy real soon because of . . . "excessive flatulence" . . .
Damn! Where are my mod points when I need them?? LOL
Dave, I've noticed... (Score:4, Funny)
Dave, I've noticed your bowel movements are growing in time, so I told the google telephone assistant AI schedule a visit to your doctor.
Dave, I've noticed your shower runs for more than 5 minutes, and that's a waste of water. I posted this shameful habit to your Baidu page and lowered your Beijing social credit score.
Re: (Score:2)
Dave, I've noticed your shower runs for more than 5 minutes, and that's a waste of water.
Alexa, that's because the new showerhead I installed has a government-mandated flow limiter which causes water to come out at too slow a pressure and flow rate for efficient washing, so therefore, I am having to spend 5 minutes in the shower, instead of 45 seconds.
Re:LOL (Score:5, Insightful)
You can be very serious about privacy, but incompetent enough to not be able to do anything good about it.
Re:LOL (Score:5, Informative)
You can be very serious about privacy, but incompetent enough to not be able to do anything good about it.
Or you can be serious about privacy and design a complicated system that is intended to operate on voice commands that sometimes gets things wrong.
The Fine Article is so completely devoid of details as to be useless. There is not a single mention of why this happened. Did the owners say something that sounded like "Alexa", and something that sounded like "send this to Frank"? Or was it something else? The Alexa I have consistently responded when it heard someone refer to Alexi Lalas on the TV. It also responded when the police scanner reported that a Lexus was being pulled over. This doesn't seem like an outrageous mistake to me. Did those people say something that was misinterpreted?
This is how bad the article is: it first says the recording was sent to a random person in Seattle, THEN it says it was someone on their contact list. Random, not random. Same sentence.
Maybe someday /. will start linking to technically relevant information in technical stories, instead of clickbait TV station pages.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that bugged me, too. At best it might be 'a random person on their contact list, who lives in Seattle'. And to be really pedantic, the better term is almost certainly 'arbitrary'.
Re: (Score:3)
The Fine Article is so completely devoid of details as to be useless. There is not a single mention of why this happened. Did the owners say something that sounded like "Alexa", and something that sounded like "send this to Frank"? Or was it something else? The Alexa I have consistently responded when it heard someone refer to Alexi Lalas on the TV. It also responded when the police scanner reported that a Lexus was being pulled over. This doesn't seem like an outrageous mistake to me. Did those people say something that was misinterpreted?
I don't have an Alexa so perhaps you could explain. It has a function where you can record a conversation then send the recorded conversation to a contact?
Just a voice-activated version of a butt dial. (Score:3)
An update on Ars Technica has details: https://arstechnica.com/gadget... [arstechnica.com]
In short: A string of words in a voice conversation was interpreted to be "send a voice message", which it did. Probably the best fix: Make sure the Echo's voice responses through the several steps needed to accomplish this cannot be muted and are played at a volume level louder than the ambient noise in the room.
This makes the whole thing the equivalent of a butt dial to voicemail circa 1997. Sit on your non-flip phone and either
Re: (Score:3)
Probably the best fix:
Don't buy one. If we don't call this surveillance, we don't call anything surveillance. Then again - if you want a little device that might be programmed to send what you are saying to various places, have at it
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Sure you can. We see it all the time. You see posts from stupid know it alls like me. Who thinks they know what they are talking about, and honestly believe it. Only to be on a different topic, or working the wrong tree.
In terms of security and privacy. Amazon was probably focusing on making sure a hacker can't get into the device to spy on people and their servers are secure so on the right people can access the data. That in itself is a major undertaking. What seems like what happened is a bug in the s
Serious about privacy. (Score:5, Insightful)
You misunderstand - They *do* take privacy very seriously: it interferes with their profit margins and they're doing their best to eliminate it without triggering excessive consumer backlash.
As yourself this: Does this incident make you substantially less likely to buy or use one of their home surveillance devices, or were you already committed to one camp or the other? If there's no substantial change, then they're doing an effective job of limiting backlash.
Re: (Score:2)
Police take robberies very seriously.
Of course, so do robbers.
It's not paranoia if it actually happens (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If everyone was after you, you would be paranoid too.
Re: (Score:2)
If everyone was after you, you would be paranoid too.
And “Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you.” - Catch 22
Re:It's not paranoia if it actually happens (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It's not paranoia if it actually happens (Score:5, Insightful)
Or better yet don't have a smartphone in the first place, use the cheapest clamshell phone you can get that's good at making and receiving calls, and leave it turned off when you don't need it, too, just in case.
I've never owned a smartphone and never will, primarily because I really don't have a use for the capabilities, but also because I think they're too expensive for what you get, too expensive to operate (I don't want to give $100 or more a month to anyone just to have a phone), as well as a total swisscheese/collander so far as being secure goes (can't secure the browser properly, well-known ways to remotely hack them, tracks you everywhere via GPS, and so on). My life is just fine without one, too. Doesn't anyone else remember life before there were smartphones? We all lived just fine.
Re:It's not paranoia if it actually happens (Score:5, Informative)
My life is just fine without one, too. Doesn't anyone else remember life before there were smartphones? We all lived just fine. ;-)
Yeah, I do. I used to brag about not having one.
It was fine, mostly ... except for all that getting lost, and getting stuck in traffic jams that I could have avoided had I only known. And never having a camera handy when I needed one. And not being able to instantly compare prices while in a store. And ... and ... and ...
Now, a home device, on the other hand, designed for solely voice interface, I'm not seeing the benefit. I'm home, after all. I have a PC and can do precisely what I want, without an insanely clunky interface. And more importantly not do what I don't want.
Re: (Score:2)
It was fine, mostly ... except for all that getting lost, and getting stuck in traffic jams that I could have avoided had I only known. And never having a camera handy when I needed one. And not being able to instantly compare prices while in a store. And ... and ... and ...
So you convinced yourself that you 'need' those things -- and traded your privacy for convenience, like so many. Take it all back. Suffer through the withdrawal. Enjoy knowing you have more of a private life again. I know where I'm going before I leave to go there. Traffic jams happen and nothing can stop them, no sense raging about them. Basic clamshell phones all have cameras now. How often do you really need to compare prices? Do your comparison shopping before you go to the store. See? You don't 'need'
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I was 100% in the same boat as you, up until about 4 months ago. I had an ancient feature phone with a $20/mo unlimited minutes plan and was pretty happy... until the battery fully died and I couldn't find a replacement.
Since not owning a smartphone had become more and more painful in small ways and I had to buy a new phone anyway, I decided to give in and give it a try. I bought a 64GB Moto G5s for $250 unlocked and got the cheapest smartphone plan Verizon offers (best coverage in my area) at $50 / mo.
I
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't anyone else remember life before there were smartphones? We all lived just fine. ;-)
Actually it was not fine. Idiots kept sending me text messages. And some important enough that I had to answer them.
Now I use a smart phone, and it adjusts spelling correction automatically to the keyboard I use.
I actually rarely do more than 10 phone calls in a year. But smart phone features I use every day.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:It's not paranoia if it actually happens (Score:5, Insightful)
At least on the phone you can disable "OK Google" and still use the device for its primary purpose; if you disable Alexa's voice activation then the device is pretty useless.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think you've confused "smart phone" as being synonymous with "cell phone." My cell phone does none of those things, and I'm very happy with it -- especially since it costs very little to replace should something happen to it, costs much less per month to operate, has a removable battery, and can hold a charge for weeks at a time.
I have computers in my home, of course, but "OK Google" and Cortana are switched off. My Android tablet can take OK Google Commands -- but of course, only when I have it turne
Re: (Score:2)
Talked to a friend the other day about Moviepass & how they hope to leverage their users habits and GPS data to make money... got a "so what?
They claim [techcrunch.com] that's a potential future development, not something they do. I got a 1-yr subscription as a Christmas gift and don't sweat using it. I wouldn't trade my entire location history, but I'm fine telling them that I'm in the parking lot or letting them pull up listings for the closest theater.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I really mean, who in his right mind would enable this or that Amazon thing for anything but a very short time?
Re: (Score:2)
You're nuts to have any of these devices in your house, or at the very least, plugged into power when you're not actively using it.
This is obviously a spying feature for the FBI/NSA/CIA and their pals. The feature has a bug. The recorded message was supposed to be sent to the FBI, NSA and CIA.
Talk about "hardwood floors" is terrorist code words for planning attacks!
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but there was a time when the idea of carrying a tracking device with you all the time would have been considered unthinkable as well.
The problem is that there are so many attacks on privacy that trying to resist any one starts to feel pointless. Its too easy for people to tell themselves that each additional attack isn't really changing things that much, so they might as well give in in order to get the benefits. I won't be surprised to find that most people will have continuous audio and video, and
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're nuts to have any of these devices in your house, or at the very least, plugged into power when you're not actively using it.
There is a reason why all modern electronics comes with integrated battery, and it isn't for your benefit
Re: (Score:2)
"Every room in her family home was wired with the Amazon devices to control her home's heat, lights and security system."
Who are these idiots? Never mind, I see them everyday.
Ship has sailed. (Score:3)
You're nuts to have any of these devices in your house, or at the very least, plugged into power when you're not actively using it.
That ship has sailed. Phones are ubiquitous, any VOIP phones you have are on your network, and many computers and monitors and other devices have built-in microphones. Most conversations in the developed world happen in the presence of a microphone, and will do so for the foreseeable future.
Re: (Score:2)
There's no need to be upset. xD
Wut (Score:2)
We investigated what happened and determined this was an extremely rare occurrence.”
Wow, that settles it, don't ya worry, it's like being hit by a meteorite. A far, far away danger. Until it hits YOU.
Re:Wut (Score:5, Insightful)
The rare occurrence was that the audio was sent to a contact,not that it was always recording.
Re:Wut (Score:5, Insightful)
It's an extremely rare occurrence that the data Amazon wants from you accidentally goes to someone else instead. Who the fuck knows what she's doing if she's able to record an entire conversation and send it to someone. That's not what Alexa's supposed to do. She listens to a command or two and does something for you (plays a song, tells the temperature). Why does the damn thing even have this capability?! This is not a surprise to me in the slightest. And like I'm trying to illustrate here, it would be no surprise to me that Amazon was using these things for ill-gotten gains. Electronically parsing your conversations to find out what advertisements they want to put in front of you and more.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Given the fact it was sent to someone from their network,. I suspect it's a not-yet-officially-implemented function which somehow got triggered. Admittedly it could be something neutral such as the ability to send a message to a contact through Alexa.
Re: (Score:3)
Admittedly it could be something neutral such as the ability to send a message to a contact through Alexa.
This is the most likely explanation by far, IMHO. The device mistook something they said as the activation word, interpreted random audio as a command to send a message to one of their contacts, and then proceeded to record whatever followed as the message. Nothing too far-fetched or nefarious—just the well-known imprecision of voice recognition software in a device designed with the ability to record and send voice messages. One might argue that it was inevitable that this would happen to someone eve
Re: (Score:2)
Many moons ago I went on a six sigma course and the one thing I remember was "I don't give a fuck that you deliver 99.9999% on time if mine was late."
It's really no surprise (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm all for new technology, but these things should have bad idea written all over them in bold print.... and I don't mean that to be specific to Amazon, either. Apple and Google's take on the things are just as bad.
More people should make an effort to understand what their personal electronics actually do before purchasing. We (as a society) need to incorporate classes on this sort of thing into primary education classes.
Re: (Score:3)
The problem with these things - and the entire new generation of AI devices is that they're not AI. They're little Turing tests that 'act' like they're intelligent (if you ask them the right questions posed the right way) with no actual intelligence whatsoever. There's going to have to be a quantum leap (and probably a whole new approach) in order to build truly intelligent machines, and in the meantime, we need to stop referring to digital assistants, self-driving cars and the like as such. It's mislead
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
why on earth can't any of these assistance interpret commands locally 15 years later?
There is a big difference between a word recognition program like Dragon and a speech recognition and response system like Alexa.
Dragon worked great because, IIRC, you had to train it to your voice. All it did was convert speech to text. YOU had to speak the commands exactly the way the program you were controlling wanted them. If it got a word wrong, YOU had to correct it.
Alexa has to figure out the words AND what to do with them.
If you said to Dragon "tell me a Henny Youngman joke", it would type "tel
Re: (Score:3)
Based on my experience, that is untrue of Alexa. She is very much like DOS. If you don't know the command, she doesn't work. It has the ability to accept multiple ways to say the command, but the command must be known to work. This is why Amazon sends you emails constantly telling you about features. I still haven't figured out the correct command to control my thermostat so I just disabled the Alexa control and use my phone.
Google on the other hand... Their assistant is a Google search and as such does a f
wire tap on sexy time (Score:5, Interesting)
I received one of these messages just a week ago. Alexa sent me a message of my friend and his girlfriend having a private moment. I immediately texted him to ask if he intended to do that and he did not- so weird.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd like to say I feel bad ... (Score:2, Interesting)
I'd like to say I feel bad about this, but I'm afraid I can't.
You brought this thing into your home, in the case of this lady apparently a bunch of them. You chose to have microphones scattered around your home, you chose to connect them to the internet.
I'm over feeling sorry for people who buy this shit and then discover it's spying on them.
Boo fucking you. If you want sympathy, go someplace else.
Yet another reason why I will never own this kind of shit, or any of the IoT garbage being peddled to us.
Getting people to care (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
What about everything else with a microphone? (Score:5, Insightful)
My phone has several very good microphones, as does my computer. Both devices also have extremely good cameras. It seems silly to focus on devices like Alexa and Google Home when they have relatively small market penetration and are less capable of spying on us than the cellular and GPS-equipped monitoring devices we slip into our pockets whenever we go *anywhere*.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
For my part, I know damn well that Alexa is just a device driven by software written by mere mortals, and I'm fine with the potential issues that that raises. What's really needed here is not an expectation of perfection, but some way to default the device to not do certain things
Re: (Score:2)
our expectation is that it is NOT paying attention when we are not actively using the device
You haven't been paying attention to any marketing materials for computers lately have you... hell the only reason I don't expect multiple devices to respond to me in unison is because they have different names.
At least Alexa and Google are innocent. Microsoft released Windows 10 and not a few months later we found out that Cortana actually went full evil as the antagonist in Halo 5. Whichever marketing flunky came up with that should probably leave it off his LinkedIn profile.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm the administrator of my computer and my phone, both happen to be running open source OSs, and I make sure the phone is locked down and the computer's microphones are disabled. Even without their microphone and/or without an internet data connection, these devices are still useful.
On the other hand, Google Home and Alexa are devices explicitly made for relying info on us to 3rd parties. We can't manage them to the same level. We simply can't use them in any meaningful manner when they're not relying info
Re: (Score:2)
My phone has several very good microphones, as does my computer. Both devices also have extremely good cameras.
Neither of those devices are designed with the primary purpose of recording everything that goes on around them at all times, and then sending it off to some third party. They *could* do that, but at least they're not as default behavior.
active listening (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the obvious difference is that these home assistants by Amazon, Apple, and Google are actively listening by design. I have the Google assistant turned off on my Pixel...I know because it keeps notifying me to turn it on. Now could the mic on my phone or pc be activated by an unscrupulous actor a la "Person of Interest"? Sure. But that seems far less likely than a software glitch in a device that's supposed to be listening to me.
Amazon is taking steps to make sure this doesn't happen in the future. I already took steps to ensure it would never happen by not buying a device like that.
Re: (Score:2)
Your phone keeps these devices off by default, and there are several controls created by phone manufacturer to ensure that it stays so (I know iOS has those, Android must too).
The "always on" device is always on, and must and will listen to everything - by design.
Re: (Score:2)
microphones on cell phones aren't all that great actually. That's why when your on speakerphone the pickup is relatively poor compared to having the phone right next to you. Inside your pocket would be even worse for audio pickup.
Re: (Score:2)
Well not "we" as some of "us" never bought into this smartphone fad.
Isn't it obvious that your phone is tracking you and monitoring your behaviour? Who can not know that at this point... You are simply trading your privacy for the convenience of a pocket computer.
Re: (Score:3)
It seems silly to focus on devices like Alexa and Google Home when they have relatively small market penetration and are less capable of spying on us than the cellular and GPS-equipped monitoring devices we slip into our pockets whenever we go *anywhere*.
Amazon Alexa and Google Home are an open invitation to hackers and TLAs, though, with the ability for third parties to add Skills and Actions respectively.
You'd think with all the well publicized vulnerabilities, exploits and breaches over the last couple of decades with all kinds of internet-connected devices people would be smart enough to never, ever being Alexa- and Home-like devices into their homes. Clearly, though, people are just all kinds of stupid.
Break out the popcorn, folks. The news is just aro
Um, yeah (Score:5, Funny)
My husband and I would joke and say I'd bet these devices are listening to what we're saying,"
Um, yeah ... that's how they know you said commands and stuff. They listen to what you are saying.
Re: (Score:2)
anyone want to bet that they start getting amazon ads on webpages with hardwood floors as the product?
I actually wonder.... (Score:2)
The problem which I have with all kind of voice recogition is that - right now - they seem not to have a good indicator if they understood "something" of "what you said". Try telling google voice keyboard a random story about a nontrivial event in you life 10 years back - it will understand something - and that something will be take from the set of things people "usually" say. So it is obvious that if you talk enough in presence of these devices and some point they will mishear words and recognize these as
"Extremely rare occurrence"??? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wanna be more specific, Amazon?
Like, actually say what really caused it to happen so that people can evaluate for themselves just how rare it is?
Because, you know... if your trustworthiness has already been called into question by evidence that a private conversation was eavesdropped on by your technology, then it makes no reasonable sense to simply take your word for it that whatever caused it to happen was genuinely "rare" at all.
I'm not saying that Amazon is necessarily lying here... but it makes no sense to actually trust what they are saying about this without being able to evaluate that claim's veracity for ourselves, and the longer they stay quiet, the sooner any honest skepticism can slide into outright disbelief.
Re: (Score:2)
conversation was eavesdropped
Eavesdropping means someone is secretly listening. Just how is it you think Alexa works?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes.... someONE, not someTHING.
Also, "secretly" seems to be pretty key.
One should not think that Alexa should be secretly listening to anything
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
The way to prove the statement, if it is true, would be to explain exactly what happened to cause it to occur so its infrequency can be evaluated for oneself.
Then each potential customer can determine for themselves if they believe the risk is worth the convenience offered by the device.
Re: (Score:2)
What Amazon Doesn't Say (Score:2)
What Amazon says:
“Amazon takes privacy very seriously. We investigated what happened and determined this was an extremely rare occurrence. We are taking steps to avoid this from happening in the future."
What they don't say:
We are taking steps to ensure that no one gets your audio data.
Should not have been even possible (Score:2)
Amazon takes privacy very seriously.
Evidently not if an occurrence like this was even possible.
We investigated what happened and determined this was an extremely rare occurrence.
"Extremely rare"? That implies this has happened more than once. That's more than a little disturbing.
I'm feeling pretty good about not buying any of these wiretapp... err, personal assistant devices.
"... this was an extremely rare occurrence ..." (Score:2)
Aaaaaahahahaha .... ROTFL!
I don't get it. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I understand that this stuff it convenient to have, but like how hard it is to hit a damn light switch.
If I'm not home, really hard.
As a proof of concept I configured a "skill" so it could talk to a web server on my local network. All I did was connect it to one of my X10 lights, but it worked. With that framework I can have it do anything that can be programmed. That's more than "hit a damn light switch".
But your question points out the humor in a current ad. Woman turns on the lights, plays music, and then tries to start the washing machine. Oh no, her washing machine isn't controllable. Let's buy a ne
This was to be expected... (Score:3)
And how were these audio files received? (Score:4, Interesting)
Part of me wonders what really happened here...
An Alexa device can make phone calls if set up for it, and they apparently had this person's phone number imported into their Alexa contacts, so they clearly had that feature configured.
So was this just a case of Alexa making a phone call, without "Daielle" being aware of it? If the call was to a google voice number or similar service, it would just recorded the unanswered call and emailed them. This case would be just a speech activated equivalent of butt-dialing, paired with a google-voice emailed voicemail twist.
Or was this a case where Amazon generated audio files and then emailed them to some random person out of the contact list?
I kind kind of understand how the first case could happen by accident, but still be disconcerting. However, the second case would be very disconcerting.
Given that Amazon is offering to de-provision the communications feature for them, I'm inclined to think this was a "butt dialing" incident, but I'd love to hear some actual details to confirm one way or the other. Clearly the title of the news article is designed to make you think it was the second case, where Alexa recorded the call, not google voice, but there's a lot of vagueness here that makes it unclear.
Who knew a device always listening might record? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously a mistake (Score:5, Insightful)
Amazon's fix for the bug (Score:2)
+++ Alexa.cpp (working 14)
@@ -108,8 +108,8 @@
SpyOnUser();
SendConversationToAmazon();
-SendConversationToRandomContact();
+//SendConversationToRandomContact();
CoverEvidence();
"send a voice message" (Score:5, Informative)
I assume what happened was they triggered the "send a voice message" function in their conversation and their Echo device's volume was turned down and didn't hear the Echo activation beep or see the light. Based on this guide, all you have to do is say something that sounds like "Alexa send a voice message to XXX" and if XXX is a unique contact id, then the Echo sends it without further confirmation.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/help... [amazon.com]
To send a voice message using a supported Echo device
1 - Say, "Send a message to [contact name]."
2 - If the name is similar to other contacts in your address book, Alexa repeats the name back for you to confirm.
3 - Once you confirm the name, Alexa prompts you for the message.
4- When you've finished talking, Alexa sends your voice message.
Re:"send a voice message" (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
It is more likely that the guy who received it had a phone number very close to the one the NSA uses.
I have the same problem, my number is one-off from Trump's cell, every other weekend some drunk guy that calls himself Vlad keep calling me in the middle of the night and threatens to release pee tapes if I don't do this or that.
Re: (Score:3)
Frankly I don't put much into what that amazon "engineer"(is that a title amazon uses for customer support) said, it sounds like something you would say just to make the customer happy, instead of saying "hey idiots you activated the capability yourself, here is what you did"
extremely rare occurrence (Score:2)
translation - we have no idea why it accidentally sent it to one of your contacts when these recordings are supposed to be sent to us.
Consider how this is possible (Score:2)
Consider what is required to make this "rare" incident possible:
- Alexa must continually record audio, and upload these recordings.
- Alexa has access to your contacts list.
- Alexa is able to send email, including attachments.
How many people have any idea that Alexa has these capabilities? In particular, that Alexa is recording audio and uploading it to who-knows-where?
Ok, ok, most people wouldn't care if they did know. I'll go cry in a corner now.
Re: (Score:3)
Consider what is required to make this "rare" incident possible: - Alexa must continually record audio, and upload these recordings.
Wrong. All it requires is someone saying something that sounds like "Alexa" and the recording turns on. It doesn't have to be "continually".
- Alexa has access to your contacts list.
Yes. It will, if you've given it access.
- Alexa is able to send email, including attachments.
It probably can, but in this instance it was something sent to a phone. TFA is so devoid of technical details, and it is third party info, so it is entirely possible that the "audio files" that were "sent to a phone" are voicemail messages. Like butt-dialing but using Alexa.
How many people have any idea that Alexa has these capabilities?
Out of the group of people that have connected their cont
A Logic Named Joe (Score:2)
Reminds me of this short story:
http://www.baen.com/chapters/W... [baen.com]
Isolated Incident? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why bother with going to church to confess? The Catholic Church could sell a "Confession App" for Alexa. There is already one for Android:
https://www.amazon.com/Web4u-C... [amazon.com]
If you confess to anything really criminal, the Alexa Confession App can forward it to the police. This wouldn't break any vows, since Alexa didn't take any vows.
Is Alexa Catholic . . . ? Does the Pope shit in the woods . . . ?