1117
Why are people disconnecting or destroying their Ring cameras? (www.usatoday.com)
submitted 8 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
222 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 22 points 8 months ago (7 children)

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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 12 points 8 months ago (6 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago* (4 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 5 points 8 months ago* (3 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    yes, that would be ideal, but at any point in time we will have newcomers, for them it won't be obvious

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 child)

    Your prior comment was for newcomers?

    "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? "

    This was obviously written for people with quite a bit of knowledge. Most newcomers would have absolutely no idea what any of it means.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    Your prior comment was for newcomers?

    no, it was for everyone.

    This was obviously written for people with quite a bit of knowledge. Most newcomers would have absolutely no idea what any of it means.

    the point was not to explain how encryption works, but to paint a picture about how many details matter a lot, so that the reader can know that just some kind of "encryption" does not mean much

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent