LG monitors silently install software through Windows Update without consent
videocardz.com919 points by baranul 12 hours ago
919 points by baranul 12 hours ago
This is so much worse that the title makes it out to be:
1. Your OS installs malware (technically manufacturers software) from a 3rd party vendor in background, zero user interaction
2. Happens as soon as you or anyone with physical access plug in a device into the HDMI port
3. That malware has internet and full system access, no sandboxing
4. It starts with every system boot
5. This software gets installed when you plug in a new LG monitor
6. OR ALREADY HAD AN OLDER LG MONITOR PLUGGED IN, BECAUSE LG APPARENTLY ROLLED THIS OUT FOR MANY OLDER MODELS TOO!!
7. And yes, if you think that's horrendous, as mentioned in the video below, that also applies to 'Professional' LG monitors!
GamersNexus has a video diving deeper into what LG did here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9uefFYe6bM
>This situation has.. no precedent as far as I can tell..
Printer, mouse, tablet and display tablet makers use this to insert their crapware since at least Windows Vista or Windows 7, I think. The last one I remember is plugging a Razer mouse just to watch it instantly pulling 1.5GB of bloated junk with "telemetry" exfiltrating the data from my gaming PC in realtime. At least it doesn't leave my mouse in a non-working state when I disconnect the internet, like it used to. Thanks, Razer!
Microsoft is to blame here, really. They have a mechanism to block any vendor (supposedly to avoid reputational risks to their brand due to buggy drivers, at least that was their excuse back in the day), but aren't even using it to block these contraptions. Entire businesses are built on this, e.g. Razer is probably more of a marketing/data company now rather than a hardware shop.
Back in my Window days. I would start the driver installation and let it sit. Open the temp folder and copy content the install extracted to a new directory. Cancel the installation. Open Device Manager and install the drivers from there so non of the excessive bloat was installed.
This worked greater with being an IT consultant. The client's machine to run smoother and drivers installed fast since they would buy multiples of the same equipment at once.
Now I only use Linux on personal equipment. You have to pay me to use Microsoft products. Microsoft has become shit-ware.
When .INF was all you needed (and some .cat / sys)! More recently, I found out that approach can sometimes lead to missing features when using the hardware. Even though the driver is installed correctly. I was probably missing something but didn't dig deeper into it.
To be fair Microsoft was always shitware. I don’t remember a time when using a Windows machine just worked, didn’t take up gigabytes of space, didn’t crash, and didn’t get messed up by simply using it requiring a yearly or semi-yearly reinstall.
I remember with Windows didn't take gigabytes of space because there wasn't gigabytes of space, and it was still shitware.
Windows in the 95-XP era wasn't exactly high-quality software, but it was genuine technical innovation, doing what you otherwise couldn't do.
Windows 3.1? It was only 6 3.5” disks.
To be fair, I had stretches of 2K, XP, 7 and 10 working acceptably.
Microsoft BASIC was a pretty decent interpreter, I wouldn't call it "shitware", so there you go?
> but aren't even using it to block these contraptions
Even worse, this one is installed via Windows update. I have an LG monitor and noticed the stupid LG app all of the sudden, uninstalled it, and saw it pop up again as an update in Windows update.
Microsoft is actively enabling this behavior.
I don't understand how this is legal. Isn't this malware? Isn't it illegal to install malware on someone's computer without their permission? Or is this very illegal, but nobody cares about that anymore?
Microsoft could easily make a rulebook for drivers, and say any company which violates the rulebook can only send open source drivers, or even ban them from driver distribution entirely which would quickly kill a consumer hardware brand.
My Logitech mouse does this but it prompts to install their crapware and adds that to the startup programs, it's not automatically installed.
The last one I remember is plugging a Razer mouse
Oh, yeah. Bought this overpriced but heavily hyped Razer mouse and it wouldn't even work right until it had an internet connection. A MOUSE. I'd never encountered something so blatantly customer hostile in my life. Never even looked at another Razer product, never will, and will tell anyone who will listen that Razer is a terrible company full of objectively terrible people.
Razer was always low quality garbage at premium prices. Gamer marketing for you.
What do you recommend instead? In my opinion the Razer mice are always superior for FPS.
I used to pulverize my friends with a Logitech G700 in Quake3/OpenArena. I'm sure it has a newer version.
Razer was never "definitively better". It's merely competitive with other top ones, that's all. Before G700, Logitech even had a mouse with two sensors and was the undisputed king for FPS quite some time.
I'd say any cheap mouse off Amazon that has a pleasing shape is usually good enough, but I've also never ranked above gold in any competitive PvP shooter, so there's that :')
I'm currently using a wireless ProtoArc mouse. Good shape, can adjust DPI on the fly, hasn't broken even after a year. I think it was like 30 bucks maybe?
Mousereview reddit always recommends looking at Chinese gaming mice, they have reasonable prices, often clone popular mouse shapes from large brands (see [1]) and have the latest sensors.
[1] EloShapes find similar: https://www.eloshapes.com/mouse/find-similar
Logitech all the way.
Logitech is a truly innovative company. They actually care deeply about ergonomics. They also introduced the first mass market application of programmable magnets (in the MX Master mouse scroll wheel) - that's incredibly advanced materials science.
I’m no longer sure about their quality though. Out of four Logitech mice I bought recently (four different models), two died within a year. At least their warranty repair/replace process was decent.
I had several Marathon mice which broke their 3-year battery life promises, by lasting way longer. I had to retire them since their plastics degraded in some cases after 6-7 years (I had several at one point due to having multiple PCs being used every day for long stretches).
Currently I use their MX Keys Minis, MX Anywhere mice and trackballs. All are rock solid. Bolt receiver works great with Linux via Solaar allowing full suite of features.
Oh, Firmware Update Daemon supports Logitech hardware, too. If Logitech sends in new firmware, it pops up instantly to upgrade.
In my family we use the Glorious Model O. My son wanted one ages ago (I got him a mini), and it was so nice, I got one for myself. Now my oldest has a big one, and my youngest uses the mini.
We've had them for years. The mini has lost the button that lets you select speed, but other than that they're still great. For better than the various Logitechs I had before.
The only real downside is the bright flashing led patterns. I've gotten used to them.
Their buttons fail way too easily, but can usually be fixed with some WD-40, CRC 5-56, or any similar thin oil.
What do you do to your mouses to make them fail so quickly? Are you throwing them randomly accross the room?
Some Logitech mouse switches have been known to fail in normal use.
At least one person has put together a good overview of what they think is happening: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5BhECVlKJA (details in video description)
They just fail. Particularly the office mice don't last very long for gaming (orders of magnitude more travel and clicks)
They also managed to develop a steaming pile of shit called Logi Options+ which you need to set up your mouse (I only used the mac version to be fair)
You don't need it. The mouse functions perfectly fine without it. And you can even switch DPI when the mouse has a button to do that.
The software allows for fine-tuned settings, button remapping, etc. It is awful software, to be sure, but it's not necessary to use the mouse.
80% of a mouse decision should be which form fits best for your hand. Unfortunately for me that's razor mice. (Well, the Viper v2, I dont love the v3 I have now.)
Some Razer mice were somewhat good in the times when the sensor mattered, with the rest of them being absolute garbage (starting with the Copperhead which barely worked). Today there's a ton of niche manufacturers with great internals that will exceed any requirements you might possibly have.
If you're really interested in FPS performance and not just the brand, choose for the ergonomics first, it's not possible to recommend anything without knowing your play style, hand size etc. The shape and weight you like, and complementary feet and mat with the exact static/dynamic friction you need. Then check if the internals are good enough (they likely are) and whether there are any firmware issues like extra jitter on flicks or unavoidable debounce lag, then look at the required software. There's a ton of mice with excellent performance that are configurable without ANY software.
> choose for the ergonomics first
This is unfortunately why I keep buying the Razer Deathadder Pro. It fits my hand perfectly and is super accurate. I hate their software, and the company, but the performance and ergonomics of the mouse are worth it to me.
DA has probably the most widely cloned shape in the market and has many identical or compatible alternatives and clones, check e.g. MCHOSE A7 Ultra RE or Pulsar Xlite v4 Large (never had either so can't vouch for their software)
https://www.eloshapes.com/mouse/compare?p=razer-deathadder-v...
https://www.rtings.com/mouse/tools/3d-model-shape-compare/3d...
If you can find an original Glorious [0] Model O, that's a nice piece of hardware. The new Model O looks like it only works with their new, totally garbage Glorious CORE v2 software.
If you never want to change the DPIs, lighting, or button assignments, & etc then you don't need the software... so if what the hardware does out of the box is fine for you, then you don't need to worry about how trash CORE v2 is.
CORE v1 is okay, but still notably worse than the Model O software. I don't know why they farmed out the development of CORE v2 to "the CEO's middle-school nephew who's 'good with computers'", but they did.
[0] ...they were originally called "Glorious PC Gaming Race" (in homage to the Reddit meme), but dropped that last bit from their company name a while back...
Model I with four thumb buttons is irreplaceable for me
I also have a Model I and am unhappy with the fact that -when last I checked- you can't configure the three or four extra buttons so they're actually buttons. Your only option is for them to generate keypresses, or do mouse-management functions -such as "cycle DPI"-.
This is... frustrating. Multi-button HID devices are -arguably- easier to do than something that pretends to be both a mouse and a keyboard. I get that some games may not understand how to deal with mice that have more than four or five mouse buttons, it'd be quite nice if I had the option to set things up so that I can use them as buttons in games that know how to handle them.
Logitech have always made great gaming mice in my experience, at a reasonable price
I know hardly anything about FPS but the reason I like Razer mice is the hardware macros. Configuration profiles are saved to the device and macros are performed at the hardware level. Some actions work with the razer software but most of them don't have to.
You literally need two or three mouse buttons for a FPS game. This argument might have worked if you said MMO because there’s a million abilities you can use but there’s absolutely nothing special about Razer mice when it comes to FPS specifically.
This. Microsoft has chosen to allow this functionality, despite it being a very clear breach of trust with customers.
LG/Dell/et al should be shamed and blamed for even trying this shit in the first place, but it’s Microsoft who holds the blame for allowing such malware and spyware trash through their own update service.
You’re acting like Microsoft aren’t pushing malware themselves.
That's just a parallel fact, no one's "acting" like anything?
What were you actually trying to say?
I am saying that people here seem to be appealing to Microsoft as an authority that should be interested in stopping this, perhaps because they are morally superior or concerned about their reputation. They are not.
How in the world does that absolve Dell/etc, OR reduce Microsoft’s culpability for letting their update service be abused?
Microsoft could end up being a higher barrier but how much do we really want that?
To me, it seems like LG is the one to blame.
> Microsoft could end up being a higher barrier but how much do we really want that?
For drivers installed automatically via Windows Update? Absolutely yes.
For software the user installs manually? No.
> This situation has.. no precedent as far as I can tell..
Microsoft has been allowing this sort of ludicrous behavior for decades at this point, it's not a new issue. What's new is how visible LG made their malware, compared to previous auto-installs that happen like this, where they try to make the thing not so in your face, as they know there will be a huge backlash.
I don't know what Microsoft is thinking even allowing and enabling this sort of thing, they've lost all touch when it comes to building things for users.
If you have been reading the news about Windows 11 then I will enlighten you -- they view the Windows 11 consumer business as a cost center that must be mitigated.
As such, all manner of monetization has been approved and it will continued to be approved without regard for user experience.
This article obviates that this is not an LG problem, it is a Microsoft problem.
Also, don't fool yourself if you think this won't come to the Linux world.
Just look at Microsoft’s revenue breakdown that they publish. Windows revenue is alarmingly small.
I don’t think it’s a loss leader but Microsoft gets almost nothing from OEM Windows licenses and basically nobody buys it retail.
This is not coming to the Linux world. The moment this sort of thing happens, distros get forked.
Aren’t ms completely dependent on consumer windows for mindshare?
I doubt anyone would bother getting into programming with ms tech unless they just happened to run it on their desktop.
I don't think they are anymore. The vast majority of ordinary person computer/internet use has already moved to smartphones, tablets, smart TVs and other such devices. It seems nowadays many people don't even know the basics about how to use a desktop operating system.
I find this hard to believe considering how bad the UIs are on phones and TVs. Even google.com does not offer feature parity between their desktop and mobile websites.
My phone still didn't come with a functional paint or notepad apps. Google docs is a horrible experience on phones (but at least it works now - a few years ago it was straight up unusable).
And you're telling me that this is the only computing platform for a lot of people? How is everything still so unusable about it then?
My experience tells me that everything mobile is basically an afterthought outside of a few dozen websites and I guess phone games.
> My phone still didn't come with a functional paint or notepad apps [...] And you're telling me that this is the only computing platform for a lot of people? How is everything still so unusable about it then?
Not to sound harsh, but you come at this with an somewhat old perspective, the same one I grew up with too and probably also retain too much of.
People don't open their phones looking for something like paint or notepad apps, they want a messenger/social network to connect with their family/friends which is most likely why they got the phone in the first place, and if they're "advanced", they'll even edit their own photos and images but via a whole host of various phone image editors. Sometimes the social network offers those things too, sometimes as separate apps, people use that sort of stuff instead of looking for "paint.exe" or tools to crop/edit images in a more, I guess "crude" way that you and I might be used to and favor still today.
All that stuff actually works decently well on mobile... as long as one is willing to accept certain compromises.
Note-taking works fine, in Google Keep, Apple Notes, or some other cloud equivalent. Yup, your data is in the cloud and owned by one of those tech megacorps, but most people just don't care.
Basic photo editing works okay too, in Google Photos, Apple Photos, etc. Ditto the cloud stuff.
What really makes most desktop users outliers is caring about, or even being aware at all of the concept of, actually owning your own data versus trusting cloud providers for everything.
That fact that you're posting on a web forum makes you an outlier. Most people only passively consume, and mobile devices are good enough for that.
My phone still doesn't have a calculator app. The thought of trying to add one that isnt wolfram alpha is anxiety-producing.
Right. Laptops are basically work (or school) tools now for a lot of people. They might have one tucked away that they pull out now and then when they need it, similar to a power drill or a sewing machine. It’s not a daily use device.
I think it helped Microsoft historically that people used their operating systems at home, although even then a lot of people would have learned Windows at work or school first.
Microsoft will happily sell you someone else’s tech stack on Azure.
My macOS-using employer gives much more money to Microsoft than Apple.
Cloud SaaS things they’re using: Entra ID, Power BI, Sharepoint, corporate email (365), OneDrive.
Microsoft applications installed by my employer on my PC: Teams, Office including Outlook, Defender.
Our applications are Java running on Linux and we could migrate 100% of our platform to Azure without any issue if we had a reason to do that.
MS owns Typescript and NPM and Azure and LinkedIn. I know you meant programming on Windows, but even if Windows disappears, many of us will owe our job to Microsoft.
Dont forget they own github too. The vast majority of open source software is on there these days.
Yes there are other options: gitlab.com, some project specific gitlab instances (freedesktop for example), forejo / codeberg, and the Linux kernel is off doing it's own thing with mailing lists instead. I even come across code on SourceForge every now and then still. But all of these are super niche.
They own Typescript? I wasn’t aware that they control the organization, but that ought to be easy enough to fork. NPM is a bigger one, but also not too huge. Azure is only used by people who already have Microsoft/Windows buy-in.
> They own Typescript? I wasn’t aware that they control the organization,
I genuinely don't know, got curious and went to typescriptlang.org to find some "About" page or "Governance" or something else, but couldn't find anything at all about it. It was exclusively developed by Microsoft for two years, and with no other clear governance/decision structure today as far as I can see, doesn't that exactly mean that Microsoft controls the entire "organization"? It's not clear what "organization" you're referring to either, the GitHub organization? I'd assume that's also 100% Microsoft controlled.
They created TypeScript, and maintain it now. It's not exactly a business for them, no one is buying "TypeScript Enterprise" subscriptions. It's all under the Apache License 2.0 and certainly big enough that if they started pulling anything untoward, it would see a fork. Sometimes Microsoft produces an unalloyed good, they're not a monolith.
>This is not coming to the Linux world. The moment this sort of thing happens, distros get forked.
I installed Debian 13 recently. The first time I opened Firefox ESR (installed by default), I got something that looked like adverts on the home page (banner blindness means I have no memory of what they actually were, only of the feeling of disgust). The Home section of the Settings page had options for "Sponsored shortcuts" and "Sponsored stories" enabled by default. Changing a default setting is a lot easier than forking software, yet it was not done.
As long as you have a computer that can run unsigned software, or software signed by yourself, this won't come to Linux as non-optional features: you can always recompile your kernel removing things you do not want like this.
And before anyone goes "but I can't patch that!", all it takes is one clever guy to write the patch.
This is also why the bazaar model of Linux distributions is beneficial. You get more choice.
Ubuntu snap
Just use Debian. It's just as easy to install and use nowadays, and does not come with bloatware/malware.
It hasn’t come for the much larger Mac world yet.
I think literally the only driver I’ve installed for any accessory of any kind is the config utility for a Stream Deck. I certainly never install mouse (thank you Steermouse!) or printer drivers, let alone a monitor driver of all things.
> don't fool yourself if you think this won't come to the Linux world.
I'm curious what you mean by this. I'm not necessarily rejecting the point, but I also don't see how this could happen without substantial shifts in the industry first.
Yeah, curious here too. Torvalds would need to pass first I think, and I just don't see other major players like RedHat, Google, Canonical, or Valve introducing this themselves or agreeing to do it in aggregate. And as end users we could still fork and patch it out. Some shitty company might try but I don't think it would stand.
Lots of bad ideas have come to Linux, like non-consensual telemetry, mobile-first interfaces etc. Don’t believe? Run OpenSnitch.
Traditional CADT means features get lost over time.
It is not immune from these forces, just not a focus by the powers that be. Fewer developers remember the good old days of Y2Kas as well, meaning they don’t resist these forces instinctively, since they grew up in iOS captivity.
Telemetry is anything including a process list. If you're talking about eBPF it's also used for debugging and server fleets and recently in basic task managers. Any data can be used to take a magnifying glass to the system. The kernel has literally thousands of toggles for this from networking to threading. And yes a program can see what your kernel supports and yes it can refuse to run if you're not running a specific kernel with a specific feature. How do you think programs like open snitch even work?
https://github.com/evilsocket/opensnitch/wiki/monitor-method...
>I don't know what Microsoft is thinking even allowing and enabling this sort of thing
This has been a feature since Windows 7, and it worked great since it would pull all necessary drivers after installation without you going hunting on the internet like in the Windows XP days.
Just that no HW manufacturer thought to push spyware in their driver repos at that point to improve some team's KPIs.
>and it worked great since it would pull all necessary drivers after installation without you going hunting on the internet like in the Windows XP days.
A driver shouldn't be a front-facing program that shows ads of any kind. It should be sandboxed and follow strict APIs to talk to the OS and that's it - any extra options should be shown inline in the main e.g. printer or mouse dialog.
And then what, ever single gaming mouse/keyboard config is going to appear in the Windows UI dialog? I think extra options in an app is fine, but you should have to download it. At which point who knows what you’ve opened yourself to but at least you chose to do it.
> And then what, ever single gaming mouse/keyboard config is going to appear in the Windows UI dialog?
Actually, why not? The driver could declare a list/tree of extra configurable options, and windows could generate a configuration dialog for them. I think this is already is thing in Windows for NICs, I remember seeing TCP offload options when I go into properties for a NIC in the device manager.
You just need to make it a bit more accessible to non-tech users and with more modern control options such as colour wheels for RGB.
And the Linux software for these sort of devices (when such software exist) don't tend to be as bloated. Usually the driver just exposes some control files under /sys and someone else builds a GUI or such on top. But there is no reason you couldn't also expose a schema that describes what the options do to make a more generic GUI for those.
As a user I agree, but I think this misunderstands the Windows market. Forget about mice for a second, if you look at GPU drivers between Linux and Windows on Linux they... just work, and you can use some apps to modify exposed features, like you said.
On Windows out of the box they kind of work, but you really need a manufacturer's software suite to take full advantage of them, and that software suite is, surprise, an advertising and analytics platform, a situation I think both Microsoft and the peripheral manufacturers are very happy with.
>On Windows out of the box they kind of work, but you really need a manufacturer's software suite to take full advantage of them, and that software suite is, surprise, an advertising and analytics platform, a situation I think both Microsoft and the peripheral manufacturers are very happy with.
What we're saying is this shouldn't be allowed by the OS to begin with. Not to merely use the peripheral in any case.
Whether Microsoft is happy with allowing it, is another matter.
Perhaps some law accompanied with hefty fines can make them less happy doing it.
Configurable peripherals should store their configurations entirely on-board, and they should be configurable using a well-understood protocol. Users can then use either the vendor's application, a common third-party application, or the configuration interface native to their desktop environment to configure them. When they plug them into a new machine, they should just keep working without having to install any configuration software.
Many generations of Roccat peripherals were usable this way on Linux, thanks to the work of one generous volunteer who reverse-engineered them.
Companies like Logitech don't store their devices' configs in firmware in a way that "forces" you to run some additional shit to use all of their features (some features aren't implemented in software). It's a convenient excuse that allows them to push their spyware onto users, but it's totally unnecessary.
A vendor that was actually "user friendly" in the deep sense (opposite of "user hostile") would do this themselves; configuration would be upstream-first via libratbagd or whatever, and then they'd provide their own configuration interface as a value-add for a uniform cross-platform experience, or in areas where they thought they could provide a better UI than the design principles of KDE and GNOME, or so that they could have a uniform interface to refer to in their documentation.
>And then what, ever single gaming mouse/keyboard config is going to appear in the Windows UI dialog?
Yes. Via some standard protocol to show checkboxes, radio buttons, drop down selections, etc.
Drivers should just make my stuff work. If I want to configure my hardware, I download the app from the manufacturer's website.
Linux users think of a driver as the thing that makes my silently hardware do the existing things its supposed to do like every other item in its class.
Windows users think of the driver as what makes the hardware do what everything in its class does but subtly different and somehow glued to a command center with its own unique and bad GUI auto started, in the tray, with its own update schedule, and ads.
How exactly do you propose to sandbox drivers running in kernel space? Do you even know how drivers work? (I'm guessing no, based on this comment)
The User-Mode Driver Framework is a thing. Most plug-in devices do not need (or have) a kernel-mode driver.
Yes, but unless all 3rd party drivers can run in userspace (which is not really feasible), Microsoft needs to give vendors the option to install a kernel driver, at which point a vendor can always decide to ship a kernel driver and bypass any restrictions.
Imo, the only thing Microsoft can meaningfully do here from their side is threaten LG with pulling all their drivers if they keep doing this.
There are people working on this problem honestly. The general solution 10 years ago was a micro kernel. Today, I’m not sure. The linux model is starting to look dated, with similar problems elsewhere. Modern hardware design looks less and less like classic textbook design, with all kinds of random chips having direct memory access to memory the cpu uses on some shared bus. Where even things like on board blue tooth chips can become attack vectors on the system.
There was a good keynote on the topic 5 years ago By Timothy Roscoe
https://www.usenix.org/conference/osdi21/presentation/fri-ke...
Agree with all of those points and there are some partial solutions (IOMMU, userspace drivers, virtualization,...), but we're still quite far from being able to safely connect untrusted hardware and load its driver without effectively giving it privileged access.
Microsoft has a program to do static and dynamic analysis of drivers... not a sandbox, but better than nothing. Of course, wonky drivers plus wonky hardware can still do bad things (io-mmu can help, a bit).
The problems tend to be in the userspace software that's also installed with the driver. Sometimes there's also some pretty derpy stuff where the driver wants to talk to the userspace software but there's no validation/verification and that opens up a big hole.
First of all, drivers don't have to run in kernel space. Do you know that? I'm guessing no, based on your comment.
Second, we're not talking about the drivers per se, as those aren't what shows you ads, it's the configuration software and accompanying crapware. Did you get that? I'm guessing no, based on your comment.
Third, there are capability-based kernels, microkernels, drivers that are allowed into as restricted bytecode, IOMMU, and several other layers of security. Do you know that? I'm guessing no, based on your comment.
You don't have to counterbalance every useful sentence with a toxic message.
You do, when you're responding to "Do you even know how drivers work? (I'm guessing no, based on this comment)". I'm merely giving them back their toxic comment right back.
I'm not sure how I missed they did it first, but doing it more isn't really helping. Oh well, I shouldn't have said anything, it's not great but it's not worth fussing about.
Though there is a limit to how much you can effectively sandbox a driver for most devices. They do have a point even if they made it badly. I know you listed some methods but they don't generalize to arbitrary devices very well.
Read sibling comments to get answers to all your (non)questions.
Strange how you didn't read them then, based on your rude and false response to my comment.
> Just that no HW manufacturer thought to push spyware in their driver repos at that point to improve some team's KPIs.
Except for every printer, some popular GPUs, Microsoft's peripherals...
Auto-run when inserting a CD worked great, until people realized you could do bad stuff with it. User action must be required to run or install new software.
OK so you get a pop-up that says "install driver or it won't work" and so you do and then you're at the same situation.
Or you don’t and you return this piece of garbage for a refund. I hope you can see how this is much superior to auto-installing malware.
A few years ago, plugging in a Razer USB mouse made Windows download and run a installer from which the current user could start PowerShell with administrator privileges. Razer first tried to downplay the issue, but fixed it later. [1]
The USB protocol does not have any authentication, just a VendorID/ProductID pair: 2×16 bits that Windows uses for looking up the driver package to install. Programming a MCU to use any VendorID/ProductID is straightforward. A USB device could even appear innocuous at first but after a timer or external trigger disconnect and reconnect masquerading as another device.
1. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/08/need-...
not a usb programmer, but are you saying i can buy any old usb chip and program it with any vendors ID and spoof windows into giving me admin? if so, gj micrcosoft.
I've heard so before: that USB is a massive security hole. At least in Windows; I don't know if other OSs are also vulnerable.
Better to just never stick strange USB sticks in your computer.
You could use any programmable microcontroller with a USB interface. Consumer products tend to have fuses set to they can't be programmed again.
The latest driver registered with Microsoft for the product you're going to spoof would need to have a vulnerability to exploit. You can't supply any driver.
You can pretend to be any vid:pid with usb gadget mode. For example with a raspberry pi zero something.
But you can't pretend to be any vendors id, only the ones with vulnerabilities. And the drivers or spyware will be downloaded by windows from the vendor's site, not from your peripheral.
But yes, usb device identifier is done through software/firmware.
Oh, it's worse than that.
A USB attack-widget isn't limited to just one VID:PID pair. It can present itself as as hub with as many VID:PIDs behind it as is useful. (This isn't new or exotic functionality; the very first USB thumb drive I ever owned did this as a built-in, maybe 20 years ago.)
So, for instance: A single physical widget can present as a thing that makes Windows install vulnerable software, and as a keyboard that issues commands hook that vulnerability, and as a storage device that provides a payload, while also [or ultimately] appearing as the fully-functional device that the user actually intended to use.
Game over.
The end-user might see a brief flurry of stuff happening while this goes on, but that's no big deal: End-users are already accustomed to seeing that kind of thing when new hardware is introduced, and clicking whatever button it is that they're required to click in order to proceed.
You can also spoof a keyboard and simulate keystrokes to open terminals and run arbitrary commands. I don't know about Windows, but on Linux it's possible to block USB connections by default and filter them in userspace:
This allows enforcing rules like "never add an additional keyboard". But the USB protocol has no support for strong device authentication, so there's no way to prevent a device from acting like a malicious version of something in the device class you expected it to be without abandoning "plug and play" altogether (a reasonable solution in secure environments where unused ports are often physically blocked).
You can "spoof" any system where you can load older drivers into giving you admin/root, you just need to find a vulnerable driver. Nothing Windows-specific in that.
Also, disabling drivers from windows update is enforceable with group policy (iirc).
The BSDs have config, Linux can run without module support.
> This situation has.. no precedent as far as I can tell..
- https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/hardware/drivers...: “Windows can automatically download recommended drivers for the hardware and devices connected to a system by using Windows Update“
- eight years ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows10/comments/8tlre3/why_is_it...: “I can't seem to stop it from installing device drivers, even after unchecking the 'Do you want to automatically download manufacturers' apps and custom icons available for your devices?' and saving.
I uncheck it, reboot. Uninstall all drivers except USB (so I can use mouse and keyboard) and reboot. Aproximately two minutes after the reboot, I get notification ballons telling me everything is installed again. Heck, even the super old Nvidia 388.1 driver is installed (the latest now is 393.2).”
I can only conclude that Windows is basically malware now... Thank $deity I haven't used any form of Windows for 10+ years anymore.
“Now”?
This is nothing new. For about 30 years now Microsoft has been constantly repeating various flavors of this “make it so a thing can automatically and silently run programs as soon as it touches your computer” thing. It’s always done in the name of user convenience. It always ends up being a fiasco. I don’t know why they keep doing it, it’s not like the exact same PHB keeps making the same decision over and over for 30 years. It’s probably one or a combination of the many well documented flavors of stupid that are deeply baked into the company’s organizational culture.
(And before the inevitable response, no this is not defending Microsoft. Pointing out that an organization’s culture is too deeply, chronically stupid to avoid opening the exact same obvious and gaping security hole over and over and over and over again is not the same as saying, “it’s fine, actually.”)
> It’s probably one or a combination of the many well documented flavors of stupid that are deeply baked into the company’s organizational culture.
It all comes from the increasingly widely held idea that the user should not be the ultimate authority over what should run on his computer. The OS vendor should have a say. Third party developers should have a say. Device manufacturers should have a say. Anyone except the user, who is just a passenger on his own system. And this mentality is not limited to Microsoft.
> I can only conclude that Windows is basically malware now...
Windows has worked like spyware since what, the late Windows 7 days or thereabout?
End users should not regard this as inevitable. Or get caught up in the how-it-works-how-to-disable swamp. Instead, cut through to the essence. It's about respect:
# Microsoft does not respect Windows users (or users of any of their offerings?).
# LG does not respect people who buy their monitors (and perhaps other products?).
Knowing that, why would you use such a sleazy company's product for daily driving? Or give them your money? Would you buy bread from a baker who pisses on your lawn every time you're not looking?
User rights or consumer protection laws aren't even part of this equation. Although they do help (sometimes a lot!) to keep companies honest.
> why would you use such a sleazy company's product for daily driving
Because alternatives are much worse or not available for scenarios people need.
There, I've said the obvious.
That may sound obvious to you, but it's not for many, and this opinion of yours is shared by fewer and fewer people.
Some things not having viable alternatives on MacOS/Linux/BSD/whatever-else is not an opinion of mine. It's just life.
It should be a choice. They were or nearly were convicted for being a monopoly. For most users, they're not even aware there's a hardware/software distiction.
MS-Windows GUI has cashed on this unawareness since 95. "My Computer", "The computer needs to restart"... Being deliberately incorrect to add to the existing confusion.
You're missing out on 37 different unrelated things being named copilot.
Copilot’s T&Cs clearly explain that it is for entertainment purposes only though.
Does that mean I can complain about anybody that creates an excel spreadsheet at work for violating the T&C?
How it it a Windows issue that driver developers pack garbage with their drivers? If Linux supported loading 3rd party drivers (it mostly doesn't, and if Windows did that, the whole internet would be up in arms about Microsoft locking down their OS), it would have exactly the same issues.
This is basically the same as downloading a program, running it and when it downloads garbage on your computer, complaining that Windows are dumb for allowing a program to download garbage.
> How it it a Windows issue that driver developers pack garbage with their drivers?
Because windows update automatically installs the garbage when the device is connected.
Microsoft could control the content of the software it automatically installs, but they don't. That's the issue.
This is one of those typical HN replies that adds absolutely nothing to the discussion.
Much like your own, and this one!
I wonder if this ritual of meta-self-policing serves some particular purpose or if it's just a case of the brain drawing comfort from going through a familiar ritual. "This comment adds nothing" is like the reverse amen in church of our days.
Another example of context collapse. Meta-meta commenting always adds something if only unironically.
The GP comment adds social pressure so useless comments are less likely to be made.
It's a discussion, it's not a panel to further scientific inquiry. Sentiments and opinions also further a discussion.
It confirms for me that I too made the right choice and it reminds people that haven't made the jump yet that they have a choice in how their operating system treats them. I'd say it added a lot more than your comment.
> This situation has.. no precedent as far as I can tell..
You got a lot of replies already, but there's so much precedent. Plugging a Logitech mouse installs a network capable, autolaunch capable, pop up app for at least the past 10 years. LG's thing seems grodier, but this has been common Windows-ism for a while.
Plus even when the Logitech mouse has been moved to a different PC, the former PC will continue to get Logitech updates anyway.
Apparently so they will be one step ahead of you in case you decide to plug it in again sometime.
Graphics cards can do this too, you remove the card and go back to the motherboard's built-in HDMI port, then one day here comes a big update for the non-existent graphics adapter.
Perhaps no precedent in hardware, but it's basically the same as the good old Sony CD autoplay rootkit fiasco. Except this one runs in mere userland AFAICS.
Unprecedented? Have you installed a Dell/Alienware monitor recently? I hope you enjoy having the unsigned awcc.exe autostarting with no visible ui doing good knows what with no documentation from Dell
Yeah, I was looking for this comment. Dell/Alienware have been doing this for YEARS. Part of the many reasons I moved from Window to Linux.
Is Linux certain to be safe from this sort of thing? I used to use lots of Dell monitors.
Are there any brands that are known not to do anything like this? I'd like to reward them with my patronage.
> This situation has.. no precedent as far as I can tell..
depending on how you look at it it has quite a bit of precedence as this falls under a long list of MS shipping "intended behavior most security researcher would assign a CVE and require it to be fixed as min. requirement for Windows usage in any company"
other wtf. microslop cases include:
- "install arbitrary software w. admin rights hooks" in BIOS which theoretically is there to install BIOS update software but there had been cases of 1. it installing other unwanted software, 2. the updater not fulfilling most minimal security standards (i.e. similar, due to 2. maybe even worse then the monitor case)
- "on boot without password requirement boot arbitrary stuff from a USB stick if correctly named" allowing a trivial bypass of TPM based full disk encryption, yes different thing but another "MS without authentication runs potentially harmful 3rd party software"
- "init scripts on USB devices", I think they stopped doing that
- ...
given that Microsofts security researchers are definitely _not_ incompetent idiots, you can safely assume that all of this features where implemented knowing what user hostile hazards they are and against their own security teams recommendations (or bypassing that team knowing they would say "wtf. no", or similar)
most absurdly MS has in all of this cases enough means to enforce a "just drivers no ad-ware/spy-ware or you get banned" policy, and could do it in a way where they still allow non-allow-listed/ban-listed hooks to be run iff the user consented to it with appropriate warnings and "remember this decision" functionality in case they say no (which besides other aspects might be relevant from a "not steeping onto anti-trust landmines" POV, through mostly older judgements as the US kinda moved from hindering oligopoly to pushing for it).
combine that with the huge f*-up of Azure in the past and their systematic mishandling of it, and no indication they will change this behavior, I really don't understand how any Company/Government agency could trust them
8. ANd this isn't specific to LG. If LG can do it, anyone can, even if they aren't right now.
Buying from companies you trust isn't a solution either. Founders sometimes get into fatal car accidents or lose some of their assets in messy divorces. THe new owners may not care about "brand reputation" and sell the company to the highest bidder.
I have a windows computer that tries to install HP Printer software automatically because it detects an HP printer on the WiFi. No physical access needed
> OR ALREADY HAD AN OLDER LG MONITOR PLUGGED IN, BECAUSE LG APPARENTLY ROLLED THIS OUT FOR MANY OLDER MODELS TOO!!
Just think about how many times hardware manufactures told customers to buy new equipment because they can't be bothered to patch the older models.
It is the same when you plug in a Logitech mouse nowadays, no? At least they don't install McAfee
I have a logitech mouse and I'm pretty sure I was asked whether to install the logitech app, it didn't do it automatically. Same for the dell mouse I have at work, it asked to install dell somethingorother, which I declined, and it left me alone.
Anecdata from two days ago, after installing a fresh Windows 10: after inserting the dongle, a definitely non-native (styled by Logitech) popup asks me whether I want to install their app. I decline. One reboot later, the app is available in the start menu.
Edit: To be fair, I immediately uninstalled it, so I don't know if this was "just" a link to their installer app or the full app. But something definitely got downloaded and moved to a place I could not have moved it myself without accepting a UAC prompt m
Yeah, the questions showed up in non-native dialogues in both cases. I installed the Logitech one, but not the Dell. But then again, even freaking Office looks non-native on Windows, so I don't really pay attention to this aspect.
That's just living in the Windows world.
After start menu ads, I don't understand why people are being surprised anymore.
Thanks - really got my attention. And, the video makes me sick.
I'm still looking at my 10 year-old LG monitor with suspicion, now, but I'm thinking (hoping) it's just too old...
>This situation has.. no precedent as far as I can tell..
I want to believe you, but somehow I can't, I feel like our industry has already mastered the art of installing malware on customers' devices.
As if the world needs more reasons to understand that windows is activly making your life worse. Step by step.
I understand shitty brands want to do this.
The bit I don’t understand is Microsoft making an infrastructure that allows this, lets shine the shame light here.
Have you installed Windows recently? It is full of ads.
If Microsoft can push ads to users, why can't LG?
Thank you for the summary. As a Linux user, am I spared because of relative obscurity, or is it that Microsoft is explicitly allowing this to happen?
> This situation has.. no precedent as far as I can tell..
No, this has been going on for years. Vendors have been pushing malicious software through the Windows Update automatic driver installation since forever. MSI and Nahimic/A-Volute (this has watchdog daemon to instantly reinstall it as well as the main app protecting the daemon), the ASUS Armory Crate bullshit, the Lenovo garbage, which initially they only put into their own images, but then started force-installing via Windows Update, Gigabyte, ... the list is really long.
If you have to use Windows, you really absolutely should disable driver installation through Windows Update.
Have you been using Gentoo or FreeBSD for a long time and then suddenly remembered Windows exists on the same day this news dropped?
this has happened to me with dell monitors since years ago, also with razer peripherals.
I'm tired of everything being classified as "malware". The word has no meaning anymore. Malware can mean "zero-day state-sponsored ransomware attack" or it can mean "software was automatically installed by a trusted consumer-beloved company because they forgot to make an opt-out window" (which is what I'm guessing happened here).
USB devices can also do this now. I have a Razor microphone which is otherwise a great device and requires no software to function. At soon as you plug it in to windows it tries to install some Razor crapware.
It's not quite as bad because it's not silent and you can say no, but I'm pretty sure that's only because Razor decided not to be completely evil.
Logitech pulls (pulled?) the same shit when you connect one of their pheriferals to your PC.
But thanks to Secure Boot, your computer is secure. /s
When will people understand that malware is signed by the vendor ?
Buddy let me welcome you to the Internet where your phones and emails are literally listening to your microphone like it’s Watergate.
It’s not unprecedented at all for Microsoft or anyone to download what amounts to spyware.
The days of antivirus were replaced by advertising a long time ago. There is no privacy.
Most savvy types are hyper aware of every process running on their machine especially those using network lol
Kill the process or don’t by an LG. Everyone just uses Dell, or you’re rich and you get a Mac one. I don’t make the rules
Savvy types use Linux
I've gotten to the point that if you're trying to show me something and I see you're using Windows, I just assume you're an unserious person and it's worthless.
All the major tools for advanced work are Linux-based, and there's maybe a Windows version, but it's probably a kludge like Docker Desktop.
> All the major tools for advanced work are Linux-based
No, they aren't. Linux hasn't yet got anything remotely close to PDB symbol servers and WinDbg's record-replay debugging. perf is... an attempt.
Source: worked on Windows and Linux drivers and user-mode applications. Windows tooling blows the competition out of the water in actually advanced developer experience. Vim is cool to the ricing hackerman types but not people who actually earn salaries. Windows doesn't need Docker because it has a stable user-mode ABI.
I know you’re joking, but there is a very small sliver of truth in there somewhere. There are some tools on windows that stand shoulder to shoulder with better os’s.
> people who actually earn salaries
Maybe a hot take but the world's "most advanced software engineering" is not happening in W-2 employment scenarios.
advanced work != advanced tools
You can have basic and not very user friendly tool, and work on very advanced topics, such as new forms of networking, innovative database, cool filesystem or storage devices, etc...
Or you can be an advanced windows developer with very nice tools, and yet work on something utterly mundane, like an internal app which tracks time off in your company, schedules delivery of parts, or provides a (granted, very nice and polished) UI to the backend database server which runs Linux.
In my experience, most of the advanced work is done on Linux nowadays. Just look at HN front page - how many posts are Windows-only and are not "new UI over existing library/service"?
Windows does plenty of 'advanced work'. Almost all video games are written primarily on and for Windows.
> In my experience, most of the advanced work is done on Linux nowadays
That's because your experience probably hasn't ever included work on Windows internals. Take it from someone who has—the complexity and 'advancedness' of the stuff running on Windows is at least equal to that of Linux or any other OS. The fact that Windows can so thoroughly abstract the computer away from the user is in itself a massive feat that few other OSs have really managed.
> Just look at HN front page - how many posts are Windows-only
The overwhelming majority of posts on the HN front page are now LLM slop or web development. I seriously dislike this insinuation that work done on Windows is, as the grandparent claims, 'unserious' or less advanced.
Workaround:
gpedit.msc
Computer Configuration > Administrative Templates > System > Device Installation
Prevent automatic download of applications associated with device metadata
Set to enabled
OK
sysdm.cpl
Hardware tab
Click Device Installation Settings
Under 'Do you want to automatically download manufacturers' apps for your devices?', select 'No'
Save ChangesWorth noting that gpedit.msc isn't included in Windows Home editions (although there are unsupported ways of adding it). This is also technically asking a lot for working around issues that shouldn't exist.
Microsoft needs to intervene here, this cannot be a normal expectation for using their product.
> Microsoft needs to intervene here
Yeah, they've never pushed ads or installed software without the user's consent.
Me on Windows 7: I don't want to use Linux, you have to keep configuring every single thing so it works.
Me on Linux: I don't want to use Windows, you have to keep configuring every single thing so it doesn't show ads.
Linux usability has come a long way in recent years. I switched full time to Linux in 2006, but I can absolutely understand those who wouldn't back then.
These days? Unless there is a specific piece of software that can't run on Linux (or under Wine), and there is no suitable replacement for it? Yeah I don't know why you would voluntarily stay on Windows (note voluntarily, if IT policy says you must that doesn't count).
Accessibility.
All accessibility stacks sucks in some respect, but Linux's sucks most of all, and Wayland people in particular don't seem to be willing to compromise on security (which is required for accessibility to work).
Touch goes in there as well. I don't know how they add a new touch keyboard to KDE and have no access to arrow keys. Making it impossible to go up in the terminal.
QEMU is also a good option for Windows software that won't run on Wine. Unless you explicitly pass through a peripheral, Windows won't see it and start downloading malware in the backgroud.
Not to mention AI assistants are really good at helping you solve problems on Linux.
Yeah, I know, it's not the same as "knowing" a system when you just copy paste terminal output, but if it solves a problem and converts 1 more person to Linux from W - that's a win.
Agents work well on Windows for sysadmin stuff - PowerShell gives them an easy way to interact with Registry, event log, WMI and other facilities in a structured way.
Edited with another method.
That's great, thank you.
What's frustrating about that is that Microsoft has also gone out of their way to make it difficult to access the [legacy] System Properties (sysdm.cpl), while not fully reimplementing all the features into the Settings app. Including this one.
They've only been working on this 10+ years...
What's more frustrating than that is the inability to have more than one control panel open at a time. Have your post of issues software open and want to change display resolution real quick? Sorry, you've lost your place in the list. Security settings are a separate app, but it's even worse because it requires elevation _every time_ before it can reload the list of issues. You thought this executable was already bypassing whatever protection, so you elevate to open the list of exceptions...then lose your place in the log and have to elevate yet again to find out the details...and open each list item in turn because the main list doesn't provide enough details to know know which item you were looking at and there's no detailed view. But you still can't cross-reference against your list of exceptions and forgot to take a screenshot, so you have to start over.
*.cpl, *.msc, etc are Windows sysadmins' (and developers') bread and butter; Microsoft will never get rid of them. I am betting (maybe hoping...?) that Windows 12 will undo the changes in Windows 8, 10, and 11 as bad experiments and return to what Windows has done best, which is discoverable GUI configuration. Let's see.
Also found in the GUI:
System > About > Advanced System Settings link > Hardware tab > Device installation settings
Do you want to automatically download manufacturers' apps for your devices?
set to No
So people have mostly never gotten accustomed to monitor drivers having any consideration at all, while drivers for graphics themselves and other new hardware has often had some associated downloads that people have become familiar dealing with.
Looks like LG finally took this long-standing opportunity to do some deeper enshittification than previously imagined. Simply taking advantage of a domino effect that has been lurking for decades.
A couple other related gpedit options if you don't even want the drivers themselves to change after you have gotten them correctly installed:
gpedit.msc
Computer Configuration > Administrative Templates > System > Internet Communication Management > Internet Communication settings
Turn off Windows Update device driver searching
Set to enabled
OK
gpedit.msc
Computer Configuration > Administrative Templates > Windows Components > Windows Update > Manage updates offered from Windows Update >
Do not include drivers with Windows Update
Set to enabled
OKVery helpful, thank you. But it does remind me of that Yzma quote in The Emperor's New Groove: "Why do we even have that lever?"
> Why do we even have that lever
For plug-and-play devices with multiple configuration knobs. It is nice to be able to click through a printer wizard to configure how one wants to print their documents. Likewise with an audio interface: loopback settings, codec, sampling rate, gain and volume of channels, etc. Or consider a USB CNC mill; configuring things like milling revolution rate, setting which bit is installed, what lubricant is used, etc. Or consider the Nvidia/AMD control panels for their GPUs; things like colour depth and space, resolution, scaling, anti-aliasing, vertical synch, power settings, etc.
Some of these settings are device- and even manufacturer-specific; one might argue these are more than a driver or the platform can or should provide. That being said, this stuff should go into a user-mode driver...
That LG have exploited this functionality to install adware is on them.
> It is nice to be able to click
You said click. This happens without clicking anything.
For audio interfaces, HDAudio lets you do most of this. What the extra software gives you instead is often some crappy DSP that increases latency and messes with sound quality.
For years, Dell's / Realtek's software had an unpaged memory leak somewhere. If you were using a screen reader (I guess they must interact with audio devices in some very specific way that Realtek hasn't accounted for), your system would eventually run out of RAM and BSOD. They didn't fix this until Microsoft and a few screen reader vendors intervened. "Don't buy Dell" was a standard recommendation in the blind community for years, which didn't help if you had a work PC with no local admin.
Oh definitely, it's more a question of why Microsoft allows any 'driver utility' to have internet access or do anything outside of just configuring the hardware.
> why Microsoft allows any 'driver utility' to have internet access
Firmware updates for devices are not a thing in your world?
It seems like windows update should handle distributing the verified new firmware file if it is also distributing the driver utility to avoid any issues like this post talks about.
That would be a good idea actually, but I'm not sure how viable that is within the current Windows Update instrumentation. Allowing local binaries to fetch random URLs through the Windows Update API is no different from them using the HTTP Service unless there's some kind of whitelisting/validation happening there. The alternative would be that Microsoft uses their own Windows Update cdn to host random firmware files that they're not able to verify themselves. Both cases sound like maintenance overhead for Microsoft without benefit to them.
There is no reason we need a badly coded vendor control panel to install firmware upgrades though. On Linux https://fwupd.org/ is a database for vendor firmware, and you use one shared open source took to install upgrades for all devices attached to your system.
If there is a system where someone smashes through your wall to deliver you some food, and we ask "why do we even have this guy-smashes-through-wall system?", "So we can have dinner" does not answer that question.
This is getting technical enough that you might as well install Linux if you figure out how to do this.
In other words, we all know that regular consumers will never find this and they’ll never understand that their LG software is spyware in the first place.
>regular consumers will never find this and they’ll never understand that their LG software is spyware in the first place.
Keep in mind the well-known quote from so many pages of Microsoft documentation over the decades, where the main useful function of a feature is the only one completely crippled in what's obviously got to be a complete engineering snafu:
"This is by design."
I had a mouse that would keep on installing its driver when plugged in, even with this setting off.
I remember Windows keeping a cache of autodownloaded drivers ("Driver Store") and reinstalling them when the device is plugged in, so the mouse bloatware kept on coming back.
Is this still the case?
You have to add keys under:
Computer\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\DeviceInstall\Restrictions
The keys I have right now are all REG_SZ (strings), and in order of "1" through "5", are:
---
1. SWC\VEN_DELL&DEV_AWCC
2. SWC\VID_DELL&PID_AWCC
3. SWC\Alienware_Command_Center
4. SWC\AWCC
5. SWC\VID001&PID0001&AWCCWINUI3APP
---
Nothing short of this prevented "Alienware Command Center" (AWCC.exe) from pushing itself onto my machine because of my Alienware OLED monitor.
I should note it's possible to shoot yourself in the foot there; I had entries 6, 7, and 8 blocking SWC\Generic, SWD\GenericRaw, and SWD\Generic — and that prevented Audio Endpoints from being mounted...
You only need (5) (see the AWCCWINUI3APP thing there?). There is also a group policy equivalent to this:
Computer Configuration\Administrative Templates\System\Device Installation\Device Installation Restrictions
Prevent installation of devices that match any of these device IDs
Set to Enabled
Enable Also apply to matching devices that are already installed
MONITOR\DELA246
SWC\VID001&PID0001&AWCCWINUI3APP
Even that isn't sufficient - I've been using this for years and every so often AWCC still manages to get through. The only 100% protection from it is to use Image File Execution Options to match on the installer name to prevent it from ever running.
The real workaround is to delete system32.
I had this shit with my alienware monitor. Doesn’t happen on Linux.
> On home editions sans gpedit.msc:
I've managed to generally avoid running Windows (at home and at work) for a long time now, but if there was a situation where I needed to get a PC (at home?), is there a recommended least-sucky way of living with?
Are there editions or scripts or a setup workflow that would make it suck less?
Use autounattend.xml[1] to pre-configure an image before installation. This is what corporate sysadmins have done in the past three decades to administer Windows NT fleets. Use PowerShell and various admin modules to configure an online installation.
Then, to get a better version of Windows, use MAS[2].
To be frank, no. In order to make windows not suck, you must invest a lot of time into knowing what to disable on the various SKUs, and in my opinion, it stopped being worth it around the time of windows vista (2006-7ish). I worked for Microsoft back then and ever since I left in 2007 i have thankfully been able to have a no-windows policy. I did briefly try going back last year for Unity dev but it was a mistake that made me want to quit computers entirely.
Yes, Windows LTSC is an edition without as much crap.
Haven't used it lately (over 2 decades with linux as daily driver), so can't personally vouch for it.
Superior workaround:
1. Reset machine 2. Tap the BIOS setup key (often DEL) during the time before it boots. 3. Insert intallation media for a decent OS 4. ...
Assuming they don't get a revenue cut, pushing back on Microsoft can in principle be effective here.
Microsoft decides what happens here, and presumably today they just take it on trust that hardware makers know what software to install. New driver? Sure. McSpam installer? OK. Maybe they have a guideline saying "Don't ship unrelated garbage" but today it's not enforced because why would you do that?
If the Microsoft customers (particularly larger corporate customers) tell Microsoft they hate this that policy will get tightened or if there isn't a policy one is introduced, and outfits like LG get told if you do this again we're taking away your update privileges, 'cos our customers hated this. Because (as I said assuming MS don't get a taste) this is all downside for Microsoft.
Pushing back on LG will be less likely to work because you already bought their product, so at most you can insist you'll forgo LG next iteration and they know such pledges evaporate in practice usually. Whereas Microsoft has contract negotiations every day, somewhere a $$$ contract is being renegotiated next week and if "Yeah, these LG popups suck" comes up - even if it's not a corporate system but the VP's niece's video editing suite for her vlog that's strictly unrelated - that Microsoft sales droid reports this was an impediment and it's on the list of things that don't benefit Microsoft.
The issue is that most corps disable Windows Update and only allow whatever goes through the on-prem Windows Update thingy. This can, of course, fire back if they don't think to include all the updates. We had one such issue where they didn't provide an up-to-date Intel driver for the Wi-Fi cards, and the version we had was a bit broken...
But the point is that companies will probably not complain about this because they'll most likely not see it. Also, they're used to Windows being generally crappy.
Ah, the usual take. Want to sign everything before it can run, but take responsibility for nothing. And when in doubt, well, the computer did it.
When do we start calling out this crap?
You'd get better results starting a conspiracy theory about it which took hold within right-wing circles, but it's less work to just not use it.
Honestly yeah
MS should get all the flack (which is mostly deserved) of this
Manufacturer does whatever crap they want with "it works" and then MS gets the complaints
A driver should only be that. A driver
> MS should get all the flack (which is mostly deserved) of this
I don't see why we can't blame both here? And I'm a big LG user, I'm writing this comment via a LG monitor, our main TV is LG, dishwasher and clotheswasher is also LG. But still, that Microsofts enables this behavior should rightly put them at the stake for this, and also LG should get flack too, just because something is possible doesn't mean you have to automatically go that route.
well you can plug the same monitor into a mac and not have this issue.
I don't use it with a Mac, and I already don't have that issue :) Kind of besides the point, LG should still get flack for it, even if it doesn't happen for me on the platform I use.
We can
I don't think "should" is the best word here, I mean it more like "They will (eventually)"
But what they should/are aware of (and work against) is shenanigans by the HW vendors
> A driver should only be that. A driver
I still remember the massive amounts of crapware installed with video cards, printers (hello, HP), and just about anything where the manufacturer can squeeze some money from.
This was always one of my biggest pet peeves on Windows. A bunch of junk running in the system tray just for basic hardware functionality.
> A driver should only be that. A driver
What does a monitor even need a driver for? I presume if you plug one of these into a Mac or a Linux box it’s still going to function.
A monitor cannot install software on your computer by the way. It's Windows installing this software automatically (for some reason), so the blame should be on Microsoft.
Autorun of malware when you plugged in a USB drive was also a Windows issue, I'd classify this as the same security problem.
> A monitor cannot install software on your computer by the way.
I think everyone in the HN crowd knows that.
> the blame should be on Microsoft
No, they blame should ALSO be on Microsoft, they are the enablers.
“I think everyone in the HN crowd knows that.”
I would think everyone in the HN crowd would be aware of HEAC, the hdmi Ethernet channel, etc.
With full access to the hosts tcp/ip stack, we’d do well not to overlook the potential vectors for a monitor to install software on your computer… especially when the operating system is complicit.
Ok, I don't use Windows and never will, so wasn't aware of this feature, and it would've been nice to have that context. Thought maaybe LG is exploiting a vuln in Windows via USB-C or over one of the niche HDMI features, but gathered it's not that.
> Autorun of malware when you plugged in a USB drive was also a Windows issue, I'd classify this as the same security problem.
Not really. AutoRun ran whatever was on the USB drive, with no oversight. This installs a driver from a company that's supposed to be reputable enough to get their driver signed by MS and pass validation. LG breached that trust here.
Actually it frequently can, since a modern monitor is often on USB and in a position to impersonate a keyboard and/or mouse.
I wouldn't put it past most of these companies.
Blame should be on the user for buying Windows
You are describing 'the blame should be on Windows'.
The consequence of Windows having the blame is that one should not buy it.
that's funny; because my root cause analysis didn't show the user as the person making the decision to show themselves ads? did yours, or was the victim blaming intentional?
Not making the specific decision (showing ads) but making the general decision (giving power to Microsoft). Blaming customers for buying MS products is not really much different than blaming Trump voters for voting for him. In both cases risks were obvious beforehand.
The word “victim” is honestly pretty funny in this context. Nothing really happened to anyone.
I wouldn't classify getting random malware as "nothing happening".
Because it spies on them and nags. But Windows itself already does that. LG could've done the same thing sans the mcafee popups and nobody would care, in fact Dell is probably doing that.
The monitor should absolutely take the major part of the blame by being the source of the malware and poisoning the system for everyone else.
its not the source though is it? its not like it's downloaded via the hdmi cable, it comes from Microsoft that offer the service of installing crap
Ironically if Microsoft responded by just never signing LG software again, but kept this auto-install thing in, LG monitors would become the best to use with Windows.
Windows urgently needs to revamp their driver consent model.
You can't block a just one driver. E.g. for my touch screen on the Lenovo website there is version X. When I install it the next day Windows installs X-1.
On Lenovo's website the latest version is 7.7.2.66 (https://pcsupport.lenovo.com/us/en/products/laptops-and-netb...).
Windows reverts that to 7.7.2.44.
I tried blocking that update with the Powershell command-thingy, but even that doesn't work:
Administrator in ~
get-windowsupdate -isHidden | ft Status,KB,Size,Title
Status KB Size Title
------ -- ---- -----
----H-- 92KB Wacom Technology - HIDClass - 7.7.2.44
Malware like this will continue until there is privacy laws that make it illegal.
The GN video focuses a lot on consent, and while maybe this is notionally currently illegal without consent, that just steers towards companies shipping a generic ToS popup, claiming you "read" that 1.8 PiB of ToS, and including the "oh btdubs we can modify these terms at any times and if you want to go to court lol forced arbitration has other ideas about that."
MS & Windows having conditioned users to expect / think they need drivers for peripherals speaking standard protocols is also part of this. A monitor shouldn't need a driver. It takes the pixels, it displays the pixels.
Gamers Nexus have a video about this. Definitely worth a watch.
I'm wondering if we in Europe gets vastly different experience compared to Americans or elsewhere in the world. People complain about LG having ads everywhere in the monitors, displays and what not, but none of our LG products (bought and used in Spain) have any ads anywhere. I'm sitting here with a LG monitor and our main TV is a LG OLED TV, neither of them have ads anywhere, although I haven't booted Windows in a couple of days and I guess I won't, until this malware issue been fixed.
But still, is it possible Americans are receiving more ads than in other parts of the world? Certainly online sentiment gives me that impression.
In general, yes.
But in case of LG TVs, they record your activities in EU too. You can opt out, but the settings has a very non-descriptive name ("live plus") and resets by itself when you are not looking.
https://www.consumerreports.org/electronics/privacy/how-to-t...
Right, I'm wondering about the amount of ads though.
No, I think the ads are limited to own services and third party apps right now. Same goes for Samsung in EU.
> Americans are receiving more ads than in other parts of the world
Ads aren't free, so yes, it would stand to reason that people in the largest consumer market in the world might garner more ad spend.
So because the US is the largest consumer market in the world, the TVs LG sell in the US has more ads in the UIs than TVs sold in Europe? Why would it be like that? If that theory is true, does that mean TVs sold in the European Union then have more ads than TVs sold in China, as the EU consumer market is larger than the China one?
> Why would it be like that?
Ads aren't free - this isn't a "theory," it's basic economics. Cost can be political (you cause the entire EU government to outlaw the practice) or monetary.
> If that theory is true, does that mean TVs sold in the European Union then have more ads than TVs sold in China
Probably? The markets have little overlap, but again, this is a function of cost. Where people have more money to spend, I have more money to spend on ads, or more money to spend on campaigning to be allowed to show ads.
> Probably?
Spoiler: LG TVs sold in China also seem to have more ads than the LG TV we end up buying in Europe. Seemingly (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48957229) with Samsung it's the same. Even though EU is a larger consumer market than China, so obviously your theory doesn't hold, it's something else than "Bigger consumer markets === more ads in UIs in TVs".
> obviously your theory doesn't hold
Cost is my "theory." A larger market can sustain larger ad spend, and in some areas it's cheaper to make larger ad buys. Both are true.
Also, "larger market" obviously implies a category-specific qualifier. People in the United States might have more of an appetite for televisions than people without running water - news at 11.
> Spoiler: LG TVs sold in China also seem to have more ads than the LG TV we end up buying in Europe.
"Spoiler:" is an unnecessarily cunty way to lead a declaration of fact with zero objective accompanying evidence. Any citation you care to provide?
"More ads" is already a pretty subjective, ill-defined thing. More screen time? More individual advertisers? More unique advertisements? Larger screen area?
> Any citation you care to provide?
Not really, the question I posed initially was a casual one, based on reading around basically. I'm guessing you then have a citation handy for the US LG TVs having more ads because the US is a bigger consumer market?
> "More ads" is already a pretty subjective, ill-defined thing. More screen time? More individual advertisers? More unique advertisements? Larger screen area?
If you open up the TV home dashboard, do you see ads? On my LG TV I don't, looking at screenshots from LG TVs in the US, there seems to be.