Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent • Hacker News Board

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#21

Post by BurningFrog » Wed, Jul 13, 2022, 3:15 PM UTC

fotta wrote: post #14

helen___keller wrote: post #2

TLDR: > Although Ring publicizes its policy of handing over camera footage only if the owner agrees — or if judge signs a search warrant — the company says it also reserves the right to supply police with footage in “emergencies,” defined broadly as “cases involving imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to any person.” (…) > it has provided police with user footage 11 times this year alone. I would actu…

In your situation, the police should be asking YOU not Amazon for the footage. I don’t have a problem with turning over footage, but not without my consent. I want to be able to decide when to give it to police.

In an emergency, you might not be home, or you might be shot.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#22

Post by bob1029 » Wed, Jul 13, 2022, 3:15 PM UTC

I fear for the day when someone comes knocking on my door because my government-approved surveillance doorbell has been offline for too long.

The very first thing I did when I moved into my new house was completely disconnect/disable all networked security & "smart" home systems. I have a Ring doorbell, but it is not receiving any power. I figure the simple sight of it may still serve as a deterrent.

Most of the "smart" home things I permit today utilize bimetallic strips for their decision making.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#23

Post by dspillett » Wed, Jul 13, 2022, 3:16 PM UTC

bsedlm wrote: post #4

salawat wrote: post #3

If the data is not on your hardware, it is not your data.

what if my data is on my hardware as well as on the cloud hardware? whose data is it anyways?

It is shared data. You can use it for whatever you like, so can who-ever controls the other location it is stored at (unless encrypted and only you hold the keys).

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#24

Post by ensignavenger » Wed, Jul 13, 2022, 3:16 PM UTC

AlwaysRock wrote: post #16

buscoquadnary wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So moved into a newly built house, by default everyone gets a smart doorbell in this house. They looked at me like I was crazy when I said I didn't want it or any of the other the "smart" devices. This was the exact reason.

To be fair... If you carry around a smart phone or have a smart watch or a laptop you're at just as much risk. The ring is just one more device.

My smart phone is not recording video all the time and uploading it to somebody else's computer. It does send location pings to the cell tower when turned on... However, I can easily turn my smart phone off, or leave it home or somewhere else. Security cameras and thermostats and refrigerators aren't so easy to just turn off.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#25

Post by ensignavenger » Wed, Jul 13, 2022, 3:18 PM UTC

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #18

buscoquadnary wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So moved into a newly built house, by default everyone gets a smart doorbell in this house. They looked at me like I was crazy when I said I didn't want it or any of the other the "smart" devices. This was the exact reason.

I guess if you don’t have prowler or package theft problems, they aren’t really necessary. I personally have found my Nest cameras indispensable. Ironically, if police would just do their job on property crime, they wouldn’t be so needed.

There are alternative cameras that don't have the same privacy concerns.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#26

Post by remflight » Wed, Jul 13, 2022, 3:19 PM UTC

bob1029 wrote: post #22

I fear for the day when someone comes knocking on my door because my government-approved surveillance doorbell has been offline for too long. The very first thing I did when I moved into my new house was completely disconnect/disable all networked security & "smart" home systems. I have a Ring doorbell, but it is not receiving any power. I figure the simple sight of it may still serve as a deterrent. Most of the "sma…

Burglars are not deterred by cameras or alarm systems, especially in the age of face masks. They know they will only be in the house for 5 mins or less and face masks make it harder to identify them.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#27

Post by lijogdfljk » Wed, Jul 13, 2022, 3:27 PM UTC

ensignavenger wrote: post #25

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess if you don’t have prowler or package theft problems, they aren’t really necessary. I personally have found my Nest cameras indispensable. Ironically, if police would just do their job on property crime, they wouldn’t be so needed.

There are alternative cameras that don't have the same privacy concerns.

Yup. I absolutely love my cameras. I wouldn't have set them up without a home server to isolate them, though.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#28

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 » Wed, Jul 13, 2022, 3:28 PM UTC

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #18

buscoquadnary wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So moved into a newly built house, by default everyone gets a smart doorbell in this house. They looked at me like I was crazy when I said I didn't want it or any of the other the "smart" devices. This was the exact reason.

I guess if you don’t have prowler or package theft problems, they aren’t really necessary. I personally have found my Nest cameras indispensable. Ironically, if police would just do their job on property crime, they wouldn’t be so needed.

Where the hell do you all live where this is a common problem? Out of all of my friend and relatives, 100s of people, none of them have ever complained about vandalism/theft.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#29

Post by RNAlfons » Wed, Jul 13, 2022, 3:28 PM UTC

ensignavenger wrote: post #25

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess if you don’t have prowler or package theft problems, they aren’t really necessary. I personally have found my Nest cameras indispensable. Ironically, if police would just do their job on property crime, they wouldn’t be so needed.

There are alternative cameras that don't have the same privacy concerns.

Can you recommend some?

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#30

Post by giraffe_lady » Wed, Jul 13, 2022, 3:29 PM UTC

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #18

buscoquadnary wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So moved into a newly built house, by default everyone gets a smart doorbell in this house. They looked at me like I was crazy when I said I didn't want it or any of the other the "smart" devices. This was the exact reason.

I guess if you don’t have prowler or package theft problems, they aren’t really necessary. I personally have found my Nest cameras indispensable. Ironically, if police would just do their job on property crime, they wouldn’t be so needed.

what is a prowler. how does a camera prevent package theft? you get information about who took it but it doesn't prevent them from taking it, or get it back. deterrence only?