Man discovers his parents’ coffee machine used 1TB of data in 10 days
4 days ago by slaacaa to c/nottheonion
cross-posted from: https://piefed.zip/...
Probably a "smart" coffee maker.
There’s no S in IoT?
Woosh.
I love it when someone tries to make a snide comment, calling other people stupid, and makes a flagrant spelling error.
Just put on there it connects to the internet to get the freshest electrons for your coffee and boomers will give it WiFi, their credit card number and one quarter of their children's inheritance
It’ll even reverse your mortgage, which Tom Selleck approves!
My coffee machine buys the beans by itself whenever it runs low! One less thing for me to worry about - Some boomer with Amazon prime same day delivery
It is considered rude to not give guests the password I beleive.
You're trying to hook up, y'know? These things happen at a certain point in a boys life.
He found that while the coffee maker had generated 1TB of traffic, most of it stayed within his parents’ home network rather than being sent over the internet.
“This is likely a bug with this unit,” he explained. “It did saturate my AP, that sucked.”
In simpler terms, the coffee maker was generating so much traffic that it overwhelmed part of the home Wi-Fi setup.
I'm pretty impressed that it was able to soak an ap.
Multicast means the AP has to deliver a copy of the packet to every other client on the network, so it's multiplicative.
The router doesn't automatically know which clients are listening to a given multicast address and which aren't, so it has to send a packet to all of them.
As consumers, we've got to start saying no to connected devices that really don't need to be connected (and most don't need to be connected anyway).
I have a microwave and a washing machine that have the ability to be connected to Wi-Fi that will never be connected to my Wi-Fi.
I cannot personally fathom why they would ever need network access.
A timer is honestly a better feature than a remote start
Sounds more like they're requesting consumer organisations to communicate on the topic
Reboot at highlander 12
This article is extremely short, misleading, and ultimately pointless.
The owner of the coffee machine was unable to determine why it had generated approximately 1 TB of network traffic in just 10 days. However, the data reportedly remained within his own Wi-Fi network and was never transmitted over the internet. The owner himself acknowledged that it was likely some kind of error, software malfunction, or defective unit.
More importantly, he admitted that he never investigated the issue further. Instead, he simply unplugged the machine and replaced it rather than attempting to determine what was actually happening.
So what, exactly, does this article accomplish? It provides no technical explanation, identifies no underlying cause, and offers no evidence that the manufacturer was collecting, transmitting, or doing anything nefarious with the data. It presents an unexplained technical anomaly and leaves the reader to draw their own conclusions.
The implication is obvious: look at how much data this coffee machine is generating! What could the manufacturer possibly be doing with all that information? The article encourages suspicion without providing the evidence necessary to justify it.
And the irony is that the sheer volume of traffic makes the most sensational interpretation less plausible, not more. One terabyte of data in 10 days is an extraordinary amount for a coffee machine. Without knowing what the traffic consisted of, the most reasonable starting point is a software bug, a malfunctioning device, or some other technical error, not a manufacturer secretly harvesting an unprecedented amount of information about someone's coffee-drinking habits.
Could there be a legitimate privacy concern? Certainly. But establishing one requires examining the traffic, identifying its destination, determining what information was being exchanged, and explaining why. None of that appears to have happened here.
Instead, we are left with an unexplained anomaly, an owner who chose not to investigate it, and an article that invites readers to fill in the blanks with their own conspiracy theories.
If the goal was to inform readers about the privacy risks of connected appliances, the author had an opportunity to do so. Instead, the article generates suspicion without generating any meaningful understanding.
That is the real problem with this kind of reporting: it teaches people to be afraid of technology without teaching them how to evaluate the evidence. There is a legitimate conversation to be had about connected devices, data collection, and consumer privacy. Stories like this do little to advance it.
Look at you mr fancy pants, coming in here with rational thoughts. "Maybe they could have actually done real reporting bla bla bla." We all know what you are. Youre just trying to cover up for the real culprits: the high fructose corn syrup industry trying to find out what we put in our coffee. Youre type make me sick.
Dude it's not even that like it took me significantly more words to explain how bad the article is and how long the actual article is.
And people aren't going to actually read the article they're just going to look at the title and be like oh my God conspiracies!
That is the real problem with this kind of reporting: it teaches people to be afraid of technology without teaching them how to evaluate the evidence. There is a legitimate conversation to be had about connected devices, data collection, and consumer privacy. Stories like this do little to advance it.
Journalists are supposed to be the ones evaluating the evidence. It's not "we report, you decide".
It's not even bias on the side of the journalists. It's malicious laziness. Facts don't matter, only the ability to click on an article. We've made journalism so competitive that this is the end result of capitalistic enshittification of all news.
Of course, it's also the job of users to look at a "news" source like Dexetro, realize its reputation is shit, and move on.
Look at this guy righting complete sentences
As usual, the voice of facts and reason is in the minority. Almost everybody else is off on tangents.
Why tf would a coffee machine need internet? My espresso machine has like 5 buttons.
No one is getting this galaxy quest reference, my dude. Get outta here! This is really gay people like me!
Anyone stupid enough to connect a coffee machine to the internet deserves a coffee machine that is connected to the internet.
new house, microwave. WIFI option
FUCK NO
Settings->clock->time->manual
DONE
day 2, huh it's one minute slow. I must have not payed enough attention when setting it.
day 3, umm now it's two minutes slow.
day4, three minutes slow.
It's an $1800 microwave/oven combo that came with the house, there's no way the warranty will cover a slow clock
OK, FUCK, isolation network, NTP only,
Nope, no TCP, no time.
!@#!%!%#$%
Fine, have internet, I hope you choke on it. Isolation still at least.
I don't really get why everything need to be IOT nowadays.
I've read that the coffee machine use internet for being used remotely to get your coffee ready at the time you want it. Bro, it takes 15 minutes to use it directly.
If you want your coffee ready for an exact time, why not adding a simple as f$ck clock to the machine and set the clock for the especific time when you want it to make your coffee?
I admit that some things are pretty useful with IOT, but not a coffee machine bro, wtf?
Any "smart" appliance is an instant no-buy for me
I have a coffee maker that was made about 15 years ago and it's got this novel tech called a 'clock' and a 'timer' that it can use to start making coffee for me 5 minutes before my morning wakeup alarm goes off, and keeps the coffee hot for 2 hours following. Somehow it doesn't need internet.
If the clock is so simple why do I need to run the File System Security Check on it?
I honestly think that some smart devices could be really useful. But, there are 2 major changes needed before they're worth buying:
Meaningful privacy laws. By default any device should be locked down otherwise the companies are in deep trouble for privacy violations. Any agreements you make to allow them to do something should be ones you can easily revoke at any time.
Right to repair / modify anything you own without any issues. If you buy a Samsung washer with "smarts", the same store that sells you the washer should be able to offer you alternative firmware from a number of different vendors. If the washer breaks, you should be able to fix it yourself, or hire someone to fix it, whether it's a mechanical fix or a software fix. If you want to go in there and modify it yourself, or go online to some standard site to download a new feature, you should be able to do that. It your hardware, you should have full control over it. Same with printers, which would end the expensive ink fiasco. Same with Apple's app store monopoly.
Here's my big issue. There's no need for a smart device to contact someone else's server. It could just connect directly to whatever device you're controlling it with.
Yeah. We're too used to that being the normal thing to do. It vaguely makes sense in some scenarios, like to see if there has been a firmware update. If there's a security issue you either want the device to update automatically or you want to be able to notify the user. But, even then, there are other ways of doing it that don't involve the device sending traffic to the Internet. IoT should really be made from devices that are unable to exchange traffic with anything outside the local network.
Even if you come up with a plausible scenario where maybe you'd want a device to be accessible outside your home (i.e. you want to start your coffee maker before you get home) that could be done without the device having access to the outside world. It would be easy to set up a device which can accept outside messages ("make coffee") and forward them on to devices inside the network. There are ways of making that much more secure. And, if that's the case, needing the latest security update for an IoT device is less urgent.
And then we have to ask the question, why the fuck would a coffee machine, much less a fucking Kureig that just produces crap by default anyways, need to be connected to a network to begin with.
Honestly, it's such a hassle now to buy anything, even a decent stove, that doesn't have or worse yet require a internet connection and a shit app.
Y'all know the first ever IOT device was a coffee maker right?
HTTP Status 418: I'm a teapot was added way back in 1998 as part of the Hyper Text Coffee Pot Control Protocol
Wasn't it a live view of the coffee pot so people could know if it was full or empty?
The first webcam ever (even predating the Web) was the Trojan Room Coffee Pot Camera. Scientists wanted an easy way to check their coffee status without having to run up and down the stairs. The Hypertext Coffee Pot Control Protocol April Fools RFC was inspired by it.
Technically internet connected though
Edit: Though it turns out no, the standard was developed (as an April Fool's) but never implemented. But later folks have done multiple implementations of it, ranging from temperature detection to automated button pressing and coffee monitoring
Smegma porn from jauffre
Coffee is so cheap and easy to make I have made it several times without even using a coffee maker.
Was it good? Fuck no. Honestly it was probably pretentious as hell.
Was it coffee? Yeah it was pretty good in that regard.
But honestly who needs a thing that will torrent a terabyte of data from your internet? Especially in the day and age where Americans have data caps unlike the rest of the world. I cannot imagine suddenly being hit with nonsense fees because your coffee pot decided that it needed to scrape the entire internet or something stupid like that.
You need some bad coffee every once and a while do you don't feel bad for putting your dick in the pot.
IoT could be great, but can't be created by capitalism. If you hand e.g. Town Planning to the Ku Klux Klan and they just use it to screw over black people, that doesn't mean town planning is bad, it means the KKK are bad and shouldn't be trusted with jack shit.
The problem with the IoT is that the convenience/feature gains are marginal and commodifiable, whereas the gains from selling data are massive and direct to the manufacturer. Also there's every incentive to lock down your ecosystem and avoid compatibility with competitors, and there's no incentive to invest in security either.
You are wrong.
IoT is an invasion of privacy no matter who use it.
It can only be malevolent because what else will a coffee machine(or anything else for that matter) do on the internet but send data from your home to someone that is not you.
We have all lost our collective minds when it comes to relinquishing our rights to privacy.
Thanks for listening to my TED talk.
I read some comments elsewhere that they think it was hacked by a botnet. The idea being that it's easy to block a one source during a DDoS attack, but much harder when its coming from hundreds of fucking coffee machines. lol.
There is no such thing as a botnet, kid. There's no sasquatch, either, but we like to tell kids things, like Santa Clause visits once a year, and that's why you have to be good for 1/12 of the year.
Why net connection for coffee machine, to download recepie for coffee?
Is that slang for lesbian porn?
I've downloaded some pretty good bean flicking videos.
I cum to them
~the FBI
You spelled racipe wrong
I thought it was uploading.
I've seen multicast amplification bugs flood an AP like that
Don't do that
Don't put that evil on me Bobby
thanks for using Leebra!
go to feed...
Why give it the wifi password on the first place?
save