Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon details its low-bandwidth Sidewalk neighborhood network

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 100 posts

Re: Amazon details its low-bandwidth Sidewalk neighborhood network

#11

Post by duxup »

heavyset_go wrote: post #10
duxup wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon's Ring device and how they work with police raises a lot of questions about what these devices will report, to whom, and etc: https://www.vox.com/recode/2019/10/8/20903536/amazon-ring-do... Makes you wonder that even if you choose not to share with police, if your amazon devices will help someone else's device do so...

> Makes you wonder that even if you choose not to share with police This is a false choice, because police don't need your permission to obtain video evidence on Amazon's servers if they have a warrant or court order. They don't even have to notify you if they look at it or use it as evidence, either. Most of the time law enforcement just asks providers nicely for the data they want access to, and providers comply. N…

My understanding is that police have been asking the owners for the video. It would seem that direct access to Amazon beyond finding out who has the video isn't entirely open.

If they can get a warrant then yeah it's moot, but that's not always the case.

Re: Amazon details its low-bandwidth Sidewalk neighborhood network

#12

Post by duxup »

gruez wrote: post #9
duxup wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon's Ring device and how they work with police raises a lot of questions about what these devices will report, to whom, and etc: https://www.vox.com/recode/2019/10/8/20903536/amazon-ring-do... Makes you wonder that even if you choose not to share with police, if your amazon devices will help someone else's device do so...

>Makes you wonder that even if you choose not to share with police, if your amazon devices will help someone else's device do so... It's safe to assume whoever's buying a ring doorbell probably has internet access as well so it's a moot point.

I'm guessing those devices will happily use the sidewalk network as a backup as well, you still might be sharing.

Re: Amazon details its low-bandwidth Sidewalk neighborhood network

#13

Post by heavyset_go »

duxup wrote: post #11
heavyset_go wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Makes you wonder that even if you choose not to share with police This is a false choice, because police don't need your permission to obtain video evidence on Amazon's servers if they have a warrant or court order. They don't even have to notify you if they look at it or use it as evidence, either. Most of the time law enforcement just asks providers nicely for the data they want access to, and providers comply. N…

My understanding is that police have been asking the owners for the video. It would seem that direct access to Amazon beyond finding out who has the video isn't entirely open. If they can get a warrant then yeah it's moot, but that's not always the case.

This is law enforcement just asking nicely for the video. They do this before getting a warrant because it is less work. If you don't comply, they'll just go to a judge and order Amazon to release it.

Re: Amazon details its low-bandwidth Sidewalk neighborhood network

#14

Post by detaro »

duxup wrote: post #11
heavyset_go wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Makes you wonder that even if you choose not to share with police This is a false choice, because police don't need your permission to obtain video evidence on Amazon's servers if they have a warrant or court order. They don't even have to notify you if they look at it or use it as evidence, either. Most of the time law enforcement just asks providers nicely for the data they want access to, and providers comply. N…

My understanding is that police have been asking the owners for the video. It would seem that direct access to Amazon beyond finding out who has the video isn't entirely open. If they can get a warrant then yeah it's moot, but that's not always the case.

There's both. Amazon has a feature for law enforcement to ask the owner nicely, but since these things upload to the cloud they can also get a warrant to get it from Amazon directly.

https://www.govtech.com/security/Amazons-Ring-Video-Camera-A... (warrant part right the end)

Re: Amazon details its low-bandwidth Sidewalk neighborhood network

#16

Post by smokelegend »

comex wrote: post #7
rayhendricks wrote: post #4

So this is basically yet another reason to not let Amazon echo/Alexa on your network.

Yes, if you’re worried about it using (from the article) 80kbps of your bandwidth. Otherwise no.

Think you might be mistakenly mixed up device to cloud speed vs device to device speed.

I think it states 500mb cap for device to device comms. That's a decent pipe for comms.

Re: Amazon details its low-bandwidth Sidewalk neighborhood network

#17

Post by nullc »

heavyset_go wrote: post #10
duxup wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon's Ring device and how they work with police raises a lot of questions about what these devices will report, to whom, and etc: https://www.vox.com/recode/2019/10/8/20903536/amazon-ring-do... Makes you wonder that even if you choose not to share with police, if your amazon devices will help someone else's device do so...

> Makes you wonder that even if you choose not to share with police This is a false choice, because police don't need your permission to obtain video evidence on Amazon's servers if they have a warrant or court order. They don't even have to notify you if they look at it or use it as evidence, either. Most of the time law enforcement just asks providers nicely for the data they want access to, and providers comply. N…

Yep. In the US you generally have no standing to resist a warrant for your data that you handed over to a third party.

Don't use cloud based cameras.

Products like ring could easily be designed so that your data would be protected-- e.g. encrypt on the device, all storage is encrypted.. you give a password to any client to view it that amazon never sees. Yet even though its straightforward to do so this is not available in any commercial product that I'm aware of. I don't think that's an accident: These products exists to spread monitoring, -- mostly for marketing purposes, the fact that they can be abused by authorities for dragnet surveillance without (adequate) due process is just a "bonus".

Re: Amazon details its low-bandwidth Sidewalk neighborhood network

#18

Post by ashtonkem »

detaro wrote: post #14
duxup wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that police have been asking the owners for the video. It would seem that direct access to Amazon beyond finding out who has the video isn't entirely open. If they can get a warrant then yeah it's moot, but that's not always the case.

There's both. Amazon has a feature for law enforcement to ask the owner nicely, but since these things upload to the cloud they can also get a warrant to get it from Amazon directly. https://www.govtech.com/security/Amazons-Ring-Video-Camera-A... (warrant part right the end)

A system that requires warrants would be superior, even warrants are often rubber stamped. Just giving whatever law enforcement wants, even audio recorded in your own home, without even a shred of oversight is the literal definition of a police state.

Re: Amazon details its low-bandwidth Sidewalk neighborhood network

#19

Post by ashtonkem »

heavyset_go wrote: post #13
duxup wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that police have been asking the owners for the video. It would seem that direct access to Amazon beyond finding out who has the video isn't entirely open. If they can get a warrant then yeah it's moot, but that's not always the case.

This is law enforcement just asking nicely for the video. They do this before getting a warrant because it is less work. If you don't comply, they'll just go to a judge and order Amazon to release it.

They should be universally told to pound sand without a warrant. You don’t give the armed representatives of the state everything they ask for just because they’re being polite; make them go through the proper procedures with oversight.
Post reply on HN