• danhab99@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      10 months ago

      They’re saying they’re not gonna just hand it over. Ring is still gonna have to answer subpoenas.

      • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        10 months ago

        They could look to argue those, but I’d suspect they just say ‘get a warrant’ now rather than allowing for the 3rd party records requests, which by all accounts warrants are pretty rubber stamp. From my non-lawyer recollection there’s never been a mandate to get a warrant for records in possession of a 3rd party outside of things protected by other laws like banking or HIPPA. So a provider can hand out lists of all your convos, locations, etc if they want. Some do without question, and after a long record of complying with police requests I have a hard time believing Amazon will suddenly change their tune without force. Path of least resistance and all that.

    • TheFriar@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I fucking hate these doorbell cameras. In my building, my neighbor across the hall has one,so EVERY SINGLE TIME I come and go from my apt im being recorded. And there’s another on the floor below me. So they know where I go in my building. It’s fucked up. I literally have zero privacy on when I’m coming and going from my apartment.

      • deranger@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        I’ve considered building some kind of laser to destroy the sensors in these cameras. I think it’s absolutely fucked my neighbors can have a camera pointed at my front door 24/7.

        • TheFriar@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          If you ever manage to develop it, I’ll be your first customer. I absolutely hate that I’m under constant surveillance any time I step out of my front door. Especially since it’s probably Amazon or any of those other shitty companies whose entire purpose was to make a network of surveillance accessible to police.

          • deranger@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            A Blu-ray laser diode and a flashlight body with some DIY electronic components seems to hold the most promise, and it’s not that far off from some flashlight projects I’ve done.

      • TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s a long shot, but you could have a chat with the building manager and/or landlord and voice these concerns. I don’t know if they’ll do anything, but you never know.

  • AdmiralShat@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Not even just a technical security standpoint, why would you put a live camera up when someone else legally owns the feed?

    I’ve had discussions and people claim it’s no different because other systems can be hacked and you have a phone with a camera that can be remotely accessed, etc.

    But those things are illegal, the people using Ring are knowingly putting up a camera where someone else owns the footage. They aren’t hacking, they aren’t stealing. In fact, they’re letting you borrow the footage anytime you check the camera yourself.

    • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      10 months ago

      Because people have been trained since the eighties to ignore EULAs and just click “ok”.

      Most people, have no idea they don’t own the video their door bell takes…

      Hell I’m fairly tech savvy and I didn’t know. (Don’t have a camera).

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          There’s two kinds of tech enthusiasts. Ones who think cloud based is a great feature that means they don’t have to worry about it as much, and ones who understand that using the cloud just means you give up control of any data that ends up there, possibly along with control of the device itself.

          • littlewonder@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Wait, don’t forget the third type: the kind that knows self-hosting is better in almost all ways, and hates HATES not having ownership (or even just access!) to the raw data and dev interface, but is too ground down by their capitalist bullshit work week and other life to keep up with the admin of maintaining their own systems. SIGH.

            I don’t use Arch, btw.

    • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      In a way the sketchy off brand seems like a better idea in that case, at least there’s not some monolithic entity holding millions of feeds to ask for access to

      • WolfdadCigarette@threads.net@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        10 months ago

        I still remember watching unsecured cameras through a site I’d feel uncomfortable posting. All five minutes of it was eye opening. As an aside, more external security cameras are connected to the internet than I had originally thought.

        • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Oh I’m sure browsing through something like shodan.io would give a bunch of open feeds. Some are intentional, a lot are mistakes, bringing their presence to light is a net good though in alerting both the public and potentially the owner to fix their gear.

          • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            10 months ago

            …indeed.

            That’s a flip flop and a bed. The 360 controls work. Wish I could contact the owner, assuming they’re not running a social experiment.

      • Paradox@lemdro.id
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        But you don’t have to go sketchy off brand. You can get Ubiquiti if you want a really good system, or eufy or reolink if you don’t want to muck about with the sysadmin stuff Ubiquiti requires

        • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yeah, plenty of options out there. I have a couple cheap Chinese type that aren’t plugged in on any regular basis. Neat thing is that the accounts are basically by serial number if I recall from back when I set it up, so with them off my trusted net and the data fed put through a VPN to home base they’re functionally ghost cams without a location attached.

          Plus they can record to local SD, so if the server goes offline in the future they can work like a dashcam at least.

            • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Yeah, but if someone is going to that much effort to track down your feed (assuming it was outdoors to start with) then you’re probably under investigation for something.

    • monkeyman512@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      10 months ago

      Most likely cost of entry and ease of use. Those are the things most people are going to be concerned with.

  • PlasmaDistortion@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    10 months ago

    I guarantee you that this is more of a cost cutting measure rather than Amazon being altruistic. They just laid off tons of people, and this is within that same train of thought.

    • Tangent5280@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago
      • Hey Jeff, we don’t have enough staff to answer all these police requests we’re getting.

      • Alright, then don’t. Put out a press release, and get our Amazon™ ministry of truth to put a positive spin on it.

  • guyrocket@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    10 months ago

    I was very aware of this “sharing” of footage when I bought my camera system and intentionally did not buy ring and other brands because I want to own that video. I went so far as to not connect my system to the internet which gives me less options (i.e. see it on my phone anytime) but sometimes privacy comes with a price.

        • null@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yup, a simple Wireguard setup would work fine.

          I also like Tailscale, but unless you’re running it with Headscale, then technically they hold the keys.

    • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Are they still accessable from the local net, preferably with some auth even without the internet feed? That sounds like a pretty ideal thing to me. Recording and motion ssense starting…

      Really what I want is a simple cam that can dump a circular buffer to the NAS via a NFS/smb share and local net live view. Seems simple but yet rare.

      • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Frigate + HASS.

        All my cameras are accessed with Frigate, which stores everything on a NAS (400TB…). Since I can mount up a coral.ai I can do object detection and throw away the frames/recordings that have literally nothing going on. HASS fronts the whole UI for myself and my other users(wife/kids). Cameras don’t have access to the internet at all… Local access is sufficient to get it into the interfaces that I need it in.

  • Match!!@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    it’ll no longer WHAT

    (just kidding, I was aware of this and am happy about the change, thanks for posting)

  • white_shotgun@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    10 months ago

    Try it with google and see what happens. Aint no way of retrieving that shit once deleted… Source me and my dead neighbor

      • white_shotgun@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        10 months ago

        The detectives tried getting footage from google after my neighbor was shot on his ride on mower. One of my cameras faces directly at their paddock they were in when shot. No cigar… At the time i had let my subscription lapse and only had a 3 hour limit to view events before they were deleted. After 3 hours it’s all gone bye bye

  • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    How were cops able to access the video once they were given access. Isn’t that stuff E2EE? Is there a backdoor, or is it not always encrypted?

  • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    I know Eufy has its issues, but I do really like that all my camera footage is stored in my home and not in the cloud.

    Their reputation is not good anymore, but I’m just glad all my footage isn’t on someone else’s computer.