A Super Bowl ad for Ring security cameras boasting how the company can scan neighborhoods for missing dogs has prompted some customers to remove or even destroy their cameras.
Online, videos of people removing or destroying their Ring cameras have gone viral. One video posted by Seattle-based artist Maggie Butler shows her pulling off her porch-facing camera and flipping it the middle finger.
Butler explained that she originally bought the camera to protect against package thefts, but decided the pet-tracking system raised too many concerns about government access to data.
“They aren’t just tracking lost dogs, they’re tracking you and your neighbors,” Butler said in the video that has more than 3.2 million views.
They’ve backed off this and ended the partnership, claim Flock never got any footage, which I think is a total lie.
They’ll re-partner when the heat is off, or just do it silently, Amazon shouldn’t be trusted. Explain why to your friends and neighbors.
Where did you hear they ended the partnership? (Even if you supply a source, I probably won’t believe it.)
Edit: nm. found it. https://www.engadget.com/home/ring-calls-off-partnership-with-police-surveillance-provider-flock-safety-031717605.html
This isn’t referring to the flock thing, they put out a commercial in the Superbowl about creating a cam-network to help find lost pets.
I hope what really gets people to pay attention is how the FBI said they searched that news ladies’ moms’ ring camera footage even though she didn’t have an active subscription.
It was a NEST camera from Google, which is only a meaningful distinction because it means they ALL do this shit.
The only ones that don’t are ones that only send data to your data storage.
And even then, big question mark, as most Chinese produced camera modules have black box firmware. If it’s on the Internet it’s not yours.
My cameras have local network access only. Most people who are tech savvy enough to set up their own storage are also able to block Internet access for security cameras.
But another big concern for externally mounted cameras with microsd cards is the confiscation of those cards. They are are very easy to remove, often without tools and I don’t believe for a minute that the fact that a warrant is required would make police actually get one before taking the card.
deleted by creator
TP-Link (which are cheap but so unreliable I had to add smart switches to reset them when they stop working), Foscam and Dahua. Dahua is by far the best. All of them record to a local server running Home Assistant and Frigate.
I really need to set up frigate. Been procrastinating for months 😐
And the NEST camera apparently has some sort of free tier that saves a short amount (the last few hours) of video by default, so NEST users shouldn’t be surprised at all that their video feed is sent to the cloud as its one of the features of the subscription-less model.
The problem isn’t that it’s being sent to the cloud, the problem is that it’s not being encrypted and Amazon is doing whatever they fuck they want with it, including giving it to law enforcement without a warrant.
encryption wouldn’t solve the problem, just raise more questions. how is it encrypted, with what algorithm? was the alg implemented securely? who has the decryption keys? how were the keys generated? were they generated from a good enough entropy source? these are non-trivial questions that have to be asked in an encrypted system where encryption is not just a gimmick or a marketing buzzword.
having encryption and “secure!” plastered all over the box and the phone app does not mean anything, especially when you need protection against the manufacturer.
When people in a Lemmy technology community say “encryption” it should be obvious we’re referring to effective encryption, not a marketing claim on a product box.
My wife and I recently moved to a home with ring cameras preinstalled, but no subscription of course. We can only access a live feed via the cloud service. I told my wife, I don’t think it matters whether we have a subscription or not… if they want to use the footage from our home cameras for any reason at all, it’s in their power to do so. They can save it, scan it, watch it, … they don’t even need to save the video, they can save results from a scan to get out the important details more efficiently.
My wife didn’t want to hear it. She said we aren’t paying them, so there’s nothing they can do. Then this news story dropped about Google Nest. I showed my wife. We no longer have the ring cameras.
Theoretically they wouldn’t have internet access if a previous occupant set them up unless one of your neighbors has an unsecured AP. Or maybe I’m misunderstanding you and you’re saying you set them up on your wireless network after you moved in. Still a good move to get rid of them but I wouldn’t be as concerned about them if the only AP they were set up to use was no longer present.
Nope. Ring cameras are part of Amazon Sidewalk which is effectively an automatic, invisible, and not end-user-controllable wireless mesh network “meant to keep devices working during wifi outages” or in other words to ensure the data makes it back to the cloud at any cost.
Their are more and more device manufacturers starting to use techniques like this to ensure connection regardless of owner intent.
I wonder if removing the cameras is the best move.
It might be better to let them run but have them watching a TV streaming Disney movies.
Then drop the dime to Disney that they are copying their IP.
I’m half curious if I cut open the box… you think there’d be an easy way to replace the camera with a video stream of my choosing? Because I wouldn’t mind cutting out the camera and leaving the device plugged into my PC for a constant headless stream of video content.
Print out a image of your asshole, though I suppose it could be anyone’s, and tape it to the front of the camera, then poke a needle through the microphone.
Or you know… Just unplug it.
unplug what? his asshole?
Initially, NBC Nightly News (Savannah Guthrie’s network) stated that Ring cameras could only record 4-6 hours before the footage would start to rewrite over itself. Yet being able to uncover what they did after the fact seems hella sketchy.
Not at all, that’s tons of time.
That was a nest and I don’t know about them, but for Ring they store snippets activated by motion or ringing the bell. Once you’re only saving snippets, 4-6 hours video could be weeks
Ring can also save snapshots, at regular intervals, but that’s a still photo taking much less storage.
Yet being able to uncover what they did after the fact seems hella sketchy.
Not really if you know how this kind of computing/information technology works.
A file consists of the data itself, and a pointer to the data location on the storage device or index record. When the computer wants to retrieve the data, it looks at the index to get the data location, then goes to that location to get the data. This is how the majority of computers/devices work. When a file is “deleted” the index is usually the only thing that goes away, not the data itself. Over the course of time, the data is eventually overwritten as its in areas marked as “free space”. So other new files will occupy some or all of that space changing it to hold the new file data.
If you want to get rid of the data itself, that is usually considered “purge” where the data is intentionally overwritten with something else to make the data irretrievable.
What the Google engineers were able to do was essentially go through all the areas marked as “free space” across dozens (hundreds?) of cloud servers that hold customer Nest camera data and try to find any parts that hadn’t been overwritten yet by new data. This is probably part of why it took so long to produce the video. Its like sorting through a giant dumpster to find an accidentally discarded wedding ring.
I’m late to your reply but it was well explained and I feel like I learned something new. Thanks!
I’m glad it was helpful!
deleted by creator
“They aren’t just tracking lost dogs, they’re tracking you and your neighbors,”
Uh, yeah. You didn’t get the news about them sharing with ICE?
I think the majority of people don’t even have tech conversations with their friends and coworkers, they just talk about sports or gambling or whatever else normal people do.
Talking trivia instead of consequential stuff…
If I could figure out how to engage with your nonsense I would.
During Superbowl I was talking with a software guy working for a big shopping ( data) company, he was telling us how every interaction on their website is recorded for data analysis, and his own wife was shocked. It came up after I prompted for that conversation, talking about the license plate tracking in parking lots (which she didn’t know about).
People seem suprised when they find out that they capture where their mouse moves, where their finger swipes, the duration, the speed. Everything is a metric.
the problem with these fucking things is that you can’t really opt out. even if you don’t buy your own, some neighbours will happily buy and install the big brother to watch you from their porch and there is very little you can do about it.
same as you can’t really escape the google, even if you don’t use single one of their service, there is always the other part to any communication you are having…
Exactly. I never used Gemini or gave sensitive information/photos to major AI companies, but my family has, including photos of me.
I’ve never had a Facebook account. I’ve always hated when people posted pictures I was in and said who I was.
Meta algorithms have ghost profiles, including dead people or babies not yet born
Most of them you can disable with DEAUTHs. Wifi cameras are a stupid concept.
If your stupid gadget needs a separate proprietary app that demands internet access, anticipate that all data is shared for all kinds of shady business.
Not always the case. Some cameras require a proprietary app for set up but can then be set to stream to a local server. Internet access can then be completely blocked with router settings.
Still, would you really want that? A half-baked device in your network, a device you suspect would constantly betray you, if given the chance?
I personally can’t imagine getting used to that. I’d despise the device (and myself probably).
It’s pretty trivial to block devices from accessing the Internet.
For those that know what they’re doing, and those that know what they’re doing don’t buy ring to begin with.
some of those that know what they’re doing, do it through pihole. But a DNS sink is really not enough. Even blacklisting the MAC might not be enough. If it requires a key from a server it might even be necessary to hack the device if it’s not a SoC and you can’t defile or use M-x Butterflies
“Amazon says the system is secured against hackers” …You dumb evil pieces of shit, your employees and malicious government and law enforcement entities are a far greater risk than hackers. “We’re spying on everything you do and giving Trump’s constitution-ignoring lackeys access, but at least hackers aren’t, probably”
Because they all connect to the Kremlin via a single washing machine CPU.
I honestly didn’t know what they were thinking with that commercial. Why would you proudly advertise that you’ve built a massive surveillance network, during one of the most-watched yearly televised events too for that matter? Did they seriously believe that there wouldn’t be a major backlash? I mean I appreciate the blunt honesty in that commercial so I’ll give them credit for that.
My guess is that since Ring has a history of well-known collaborations with police and ICE, they wanted to re-frame their evil surveillance network as a way to save a puppy. Instead, lots of uninformed normies suddenly realized what those cameras are capable of, and had a huge negative reaction given the state of things.
Tbh I think the people at the top still haven’t caught up with the rapid changing sentiments among the population. My zero-tech-savy retired mother in-law was talking to me about Palantir the other day.
These people are so fucking out of touch that it’s ridiculous
Because the most evil people on the planet are universally convinced that they’re heroes.
I honestly didn’t know what they were thinking with that commercial. Why would you proudly advertise that you’ve built a massive surveillance network
Presumably because most end users are in deep with the “if you do nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about” crowd … and besides it can find a lost dog /s.
They brought these sorts of intrusive cameras in the first place so privacy was not top of mind, or even in 2nd or 3rd place.
I would also put a good bit of the blame on executives and marketing people being way out of touch with the average person.
I went with industry standard localized cameras that I could rider python on two of my servers at home for. Id love to try to hack up a ring , see if I could extract out what makes it “evil” and leave the rest, to even a relay to another server or something.
Things I think about.
My only regret is that I can’t smash one because was never stupid enough to trust these things to begin with.
My friend, have you heard of Flock cameras?
Yes and I hate them cause it’s a pain in the ass having to route all my drives around them. Some trips take me 3x as long as they should cause of that stupid privacy-invading bullshit.
Well, I wouldn’t suggest doing crimes to physically break them, but you can break their little AI brains with a bit of adversarial noise and someone with a printer that can print on some sort of clear backing.
Benn Jordan https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pp9MwZkHiMQ
I clicked the link just to get a brief look at this video and ended up watching the whole thing and subscribing to Benn Jordan. Thank you for sharing!
I did the same thing. The one about ‘gifts for people who don’t trust the government’ is what got me when someone posted it here or in c/privacy. I’m glad I could pass it along!
I like his viewpoint, he always has interesting projects and his music background adds a nice little touch to the production values of his content.
e: Also, if you’re into math and physics check out 3Blue1Brown (Neural Networks math: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aircAruvnKk) and Art of the Problem (Explaining how energy can turn into rocks, physics explainer: https://youtu.be/f8O3XMrC8hg)
My personal choice for security stuff is ubiquiti, but I’m sure someone here can find a super cheap doorbell camera that saves to an SD card and accomplishes the same thing.
I’m really glad people didn’t just fall over for this ad, and connected the dots on what Amazon is doing
Reolink doorbell cameras don’t need to be connected to the cloud. They can record to an SD card or upload to an FTP server. You can connect to them with RTSP and run your own NVR if you want too.
+1 for Reolink. I have those and UniFi cameras tied to my UniFi system.
I have a few Amcrest cameras and they’re pretty decent as well. Outdoor rated, PoE, 4k, UV LEDs, they have PTZ variants too and offer standard RTSP streams without any kind of vendor software hassle.
Running a local NVR with some image segmentation and classification models is goodbut also consider adding a bit of Kismet and SDR trickery. Having a bit more awareness is always useful and the radio spectrum is increasingly full of useful information that can be relevant to home security.
Most people are also radio beacons of some form or another due to their tech/car/flipper zero and being able to detect things like modern cars, people wearing bluetooth earbuds, wifi deauthentication attacks or new radio sources which could indicate some kind of hostile surveillance or tracking… those are all useful and relatively simple things to monitor. With a bit more money you could make some good estimates about the location and relative motion of these sources.
You could also add some cheap SDRs and listen to your local county’s dispatch trunking system. This is perfectly legal, it’s all broadcast in the clear. CB users and scanner owners used to do this but it became harder once they switched to trunking systems because you required some kind of processor to navigate the trunking protocol. Now you can do the same thing with 2 cheap RTL-SDRs and some open source software: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9KJrtIO8_4 Language models reading transcripts of these could alert you to any major events near you, like a traffic accident (or active shooting, USA! USA! USA!).
Obviously this is a bit more involved than ‘Press buy button on Amazon, login to camera, glue to wall.’, but the end product that you can create is better than anything that you can buy as a commercial product.
The audio system in my car is broken. I use my SDR to stream the radio to my phone and play it on a Bluetooth speaker. Overkill? Yes. Learning experience? Yes.
I had a similar experience, playing with a spectrum analyzer connected to the SDR and the first signals that I ‘found’ were the WFM broadcasts and celebrated by listening to the radio for a few hours.
In hindsight, I didn’t realize how much the antenna size and just happened to have the right length antenna to get good WFM coverage.
Hmm yes, I understand some of these acronyms. /s
SD - Secure Digital (memory card you’d use for most things)
FTP - File Transfer Protocol (a way to upload files to a server)
RTSP - Real Time Streaming Protocol (a way to stream video)
NVR - Network Video Recorder (a device that records video)
I love lemmy. On the other site, you’d have 100 snarky and/or insulting replies. Here, there’s a single reply that is straightforward and helpful.
I dunno, thanks for being a bright spot in otherwise somewhat bleak world.
I chose Reolink. AFAICT it’s not leaking anything outside my network and it’s fairly inexpensive. Not as cheap as the subsidized Ring brand but hey, at least I own them.
I have a reolink that I use as a baby monitor. It’s on our wifi but I set up my router to prevent it from accessing the internet. So you can only access it if you’re phone is on the wifi. And it records onto an SD card.
I’ve been worried about security, and therefore haven’t even researched the options. I’d like to have one, but I don’t want people able to see what’s happening without me allowing it for specific footage. Only guaranteed way was to just not have any. I could do local only, but there is less utility with that. So, it wasn’t worth the effort and cost.
I have my reolink cameras setup on an internal network without direct internet access, but have a server running Frigate and a VPN that I can remote into from my phone. Gives me full control of where the recordings are backed up and remote access controls. This setup works for their doorbells too which is neat.
Why would you wire your house up to this shit anyway.
Personally are you like the idea of having security cameras on my house because they increase security in the same way that a prominent burglar alarm deters theft.
I can even see why these things been internet connected is appealing, it means the cameras can be accessed remotely when you’re out and about and people can’t just break in and then take the recording device.
That can be run without Ring, Alexa or any other smart house crap.
does anyone have a link to the original superbowl ad?
Found it: https://youtu.be/hiaIHLwJvPQ?t=1449
