Via Wirecutter:

(Natural News) The video doorbell company Ring is taking some heat after it revealed that authorities can keep homeowners’ videos forever and share them with any party they choose.

Hundreds of police forces in the U.S. have formed partnerships with the company, who says the technology can help tackle crimes like burglary and trespassing. When Senator Edward J. Markey wrote to Ring’s owner, Amazon, to ask how the footage taken by its doorbell videos is used and how civil liberties are being protected, the company’s vice president of public policy, Brian Huseman responded.

He said that the company does not place many restrictions on the ways in which police can use and share the videos, although he did clarify that a homeowner is not required to share the footage with the authorities and Ring does not identify any users who refuse police requests for videos.

Amazon and Ring under fire after revealing authorities can keep homeowner videos forever, endangering user privacy

I have a “Rover” camera I use for smoking ribs (keeping an eye on temp) and also to watch points of entrance from inside the house when we leave home for extended periods. The camera gets unplugged and boxed away when we get home because in this era of remote electronics, I don’t believe in factory-installed Off buttons. No power guarantees cessation of activities.

Not that I am paranoid, but the assholes keep proving me right.

Spread the love

By Miguel.GFZ

Semi-retired like Vito Corleone before the heart attack. Consiglieri to J.Kb and AWA. I lived in a Gun Control Paradise: It sucked and got people killed. I do believe that Freedom scares the political elites.

11 thoughts on “And a reason NOT to have a camera inside your home.”
    1. If anything the private mega companies have proven to us lately is that they will violate your rights because they do not fear retribution. So what if they invade your privacy?

  1. Yeah… one of several reasons we don’t yet have video doorbells. I figure on building my own, when I get around to it, because that’s apparently the only way to get one that’ll talk to my own server (and if I build it, and write the firmware, it’ll bloody well talk only to my server).
    I also seriously dislike the idea of having any sort of Internet Things (unless they’re firmly under my control) inside the firewall. Altogether too much potential for mischief on the home network.
    The grand plan calls for a bunch of wired IP cameras, on a segregated net that only communicates with the video computer, not with the outside world. Alas, we’re having to resort to various temporary expedients until we can get cables pulled.

    1. This is where I’m at. Ring was on the table for a doorbell solution until I dig further into their terms of service and the privacy issues, that took them off the list. It didn’t help (Or did) that I already have and intense dislike for the “internet of things” (it’s one of the reasons I’m holding on to my 12 year old TV for dear life, finding a new, non-smart TV is about impossible) and there’s no way that I’ll be putting security cameras around my house linked to Amazon or Google servers.

      Luckily, the previous homeowners here had a camera system that was wired in with coax. Downside is the cameras are older (if they’re 720 resolution I’d be amazed), the prior owners took almost all the hardware with them, and the current system leaves several blind spots around the house. Right now, I’m at the same point as you with the grand plan. Upside is a lot of the cable runs are already there for the coax cable. I just need to source new cameras, figure out if I need to run Cat 5/6 cable in place of coax, and figure out the DVR/server setup.

  2. my day job involves a lot of nerdery.
    All my cameras are on essentially their own separate network (VLAN) that has zero access to the outside world. I also don’t buy any devices that require a phone app to operate, because they communicate with outside servers that I have no control over*.

    And I still wouldn’t put any network camera inside my house**.

    Once data leaves your network, it is no longer your data. Always assume that whatever online service you’re using will eventually be bought by Facebook and have access to all data they’ve ever collected from you.

    *I have a story about getting a free Nest Camera and then giving it away about 15 minutes after I plugged it in the first time. You needed the Google Home App to set it up, so I installed that. Google almost immediately emailed me a picture of myself, sitting at my workbench, saying that they’d detected a person on my feed. I did not explicitly grant them access to view my camera nor authorize them to do AI on the feed, but I’m sure it was in the 7800 page Terms of Service.

    **I have one attached to my 3D printer in the garage, and another pointed at the CNC machine in my workshop, but otherwise everything is outside.

    1. Good advice. Similar points apply to Alexa/Siri/whatever.

      BTW, does your 3d printer use web-hosted tools? If yes, your designs may be out there for unwanted parties to see. Some companies offer that but may give you a choice (at extra cost) like MarkForged.

      1. No, the software I use is local, both for design and for slicing. For a time, I had a side business designing 3d printed parts.

        I literally trust the cloud with NOTHING important.

  3. Lorex. Two systems with one air gaped from the intertoobs. Front cameras accessible via phone, house and backyard only though the closed system. All hardwired PoE. No service fees, stored all on my systems, on its own router and firewall, simple to air gap the other system if need be.

  4. When I heard that the Authorities could access wireless/Internet systems such as Ring, I was a “no way” on that.

    I have a regular system with a hard drive.

Only one rule: Don't be a dick.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.