17 ms·

Amazon's Ring Police Portal For Mass Surveillance

281 points by _r3e4 8y ago

_r3e4 8y ago
I found this dropbox link to Ring's marketing video for Police Departments to use their smart video cameras for mass surveillance. This was made before Amazon acquired them. At the end of the demo the CEO states that their facial recognition search feature will be available soon. This software is made in Ukraine and the hardware is manufactured in China. There was no private company contract bid - Ring is just giving this to cops for free and offering customers a discount for letting their video surveillance from their home / doorbell be shared with the police in this portal. over 50+ local police departments are now partners. There is no encryption. There is no 2FA. There is no legal protection for privacy of citizens face's caught in these cameras and added to their facial recognition algorithms. Ring Ukraine is hiring aggressively, they grew from 10 engineers to 500 in two years. It's one of the top image processing R&D labs in Eastern Europe. Based on their job descriptions.... the facial recognition search being deployed in the police portals of Ring is pretty advanced. for more on Ring Ukraine www.ring-ukraine.com I got this ring marketing video from officer.com / a website for police industry news.
- fixermark 8y ago
  > Ring is just giving this to cops for free and offering customers a discount for letting their video surveillance from their home / doorbell be shared with the police in this portal That's a hell of a market strategy. Do you have a source on that discount story? Because I'm not able to find one right now.
  - reaperducer 8y ago
    Do you have a source on that discount story? Because I'm not able to find one right now. Not the OP, but my neighborhood's Nextdoor message board is filled with both Ring discounts, and pleas from the local PD for people to buy them. I have no proof that they're related, but if the marketing is being done through hyper-targeted methods like this, it might explain why it's not Googleable.
    - fixermark 8y ago
      I think I misunderstood OP's meaning. I though they were claiming the police were paying directly for video signal; it appears police or Ring are offering discounts to get the hardware in the belief that citizens will volunteer the video when the local police need help to stop a crime.
- alphabettsy 8y ago
  Huh? How did you get something entirely different from the article. The article says police will have access to the neighborhoods law enforcement portal, which only gives them access to public posts of Ring users. The only addition that the law enforcement portal appears to give is the fact that they can request video clips from homeowners. There are some valid concerns there but you’re mischaracterizing this tool and how it works.
- Someone1234 8y ago
  > There is no encryption. There is no 2FA. There is no legal protection for privacy of citizens face's caught in these cameras and added to their facial recognition algorithms. Those are some interesting claims. Where is this information sourced from?
  - _r3e4 8y ago
    the engineering team
- joering2 8y ago
  > There is no encryption. There is no 2FA. There is no legal protection for privacy of citizens face's caught in these cameras and added to their facial recognition algorithms. Yes and no lawsuit will be won either. Every judge will strike it based on being in public assumption of lack of privacy. If you walk on public street, don't assume your privacy is protected :(
  - monocasa 8y ago
    It's way more complex than that. For instance here the evidence from a webcam filming from a public vantage point was struck down. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/cops-illegally-nailed-webcam-to-utility-pole-for-6-weeks-to-spy-on-house/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/cops-illegally-n... I've also seen SCOTUS rulings that they see a difference between public ancillary recordings, and mass surveillance of all public actions.
    - joering2 8y ago
      Great example +1; however in this example cops assumed Mr. Vargas to commit crime and hence setup cam to watch aka surveillance his property 24/7. Very difference from situation where average citizens records their front yard 24/7 not expecting or assuming a crime will occur, and then having that video being obtained when the crime happens. In other words, this case is about active surveillance, versus Ring cams are more passive (record everything all the time for no specific reason)
      - balls187 8y ago
        Ring is marketed as a security camera, and one of it's primary use cases is providing video recording in the event of a crime.
        joering2 8y ago
        Exactly! Not marketed as a tool to surveillance your neighbor 24/7.
  - 8y ago
- chaostheory 8y ago
  I'm a Ring customer. The Ring Portal is optional and opt-in. People want this. This is similar but not the same as Yc's Flock https://www.flocksafety.com/ https://www.flocksafety.com/ but it doesn't require a home owner's association to set up and it's inexpensive. (Flock focuses on storing license plates.) Stuff like this helps police do something about robberies and burglaries. It's harder to ignore and file away when there's video evidence. Megapixel IP cameras are getting cheaper and cheaper every day. We already live in a mass surveillance society with microphones and cameras in almost all of our rooms, with some people even installing Echos in their bathrooms. Instead of bad Big Brother, we get helpful Little Sister (Alexa, Siri, Kortana, ...). imo The only real way to completely escape it, is to avoid technology and live outside of large metros; away from civilization
  - kakarot 8y ago
    > The only real way to completely escape it, is to avoid technology and live outside of large metros; away from civilization This is an incredibly subservient, defeatist attitude. I do not allow devices like Alexa into my home. I do not own a smart TV. Besides studio recording equipment, the only microphone in my house is on my phone. If I have my own cameras, and a burglary takes place, I will share that part of the video with the local police. Letting them just hook in is positively insane. Saying it's OK to let Big Brother into my house on the basis of fear and because Little Sister is already there is not only completely irrational, but cowardly as well. As the saying goes, "He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security."
    - chaostheory 8y ago
      > This is an incredibly subservient, defeatist attitude. It's reality if you use a smart phone or own a tablet, or are around others that do. Do your friends and family own one? Do you not own and use a smart phone? You know the device that tracks your location and pushes your data to the cloud. Pretending that doesn't exist is just another instance of cognitive dissonance. Besides what happens when people take a picture of you? They post it to the cloud along with datetime and location data, and even names. A lot of people who value convenience above all do not realize what they are trading it for. Many of these people don't even realize that's what they value most. It's hard not to be in that category if you use almost any kind of cloud connected service. I'm only making blissfully ignorant people aware of it. Maybe you should reexamine the digital aspect of your own life before strongly judging me. > I do not allow devices like Alexa into my home. What about Siri, Google, or Kortana? Siri is on both iPhones and Macs now. Kortana is on every Win 10 machine. Google Assistant / Ok Google is on Chrome OS and Android. Do you own any IoT device? Even if they don't have a mic or camera, they can still track you and your habits. > "He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security." I'm not sure how I've traded my liberty on this one. It's not like I voted for a Patriot Act, where I don't have a choice on what I'm willing to share. > Letting them just hook in is positively insane. If I have my own cameras, and a burglary takes place, I will share that part of the video with the local police. They don't "hook in". It's just NextDoor for Ring owners where it's easier to share video with other Ring owners and now police. You CAN pick and choose what you want to share on Ring Neighborhood. That's how it works. Again no one is forced to even join Ring Neighborhood and you pick and choose what you want to share. Most importantly, even after you join - you can opt out at anytime. People now have a better chance of getting police to deal with people who steal their packages.
- zyren 8y ago
  do you have a mirror to this? video has been taken down.
  - zyren 8y ago
    found a mirror: https://vimeo.com/290482418 https://vimeo.com/290482418
- conanbatt 8y ago
  No encryption? You can siphon the videos from the ring device by just connecting on the same wifi? The concerns of allowing a surveillance state are real. I hope Jamie addresses all these concerns.
_r3e4 8y ago
original article with link to marketing video dropbox https://www.officer.com/command-hq/technology/computers-software/apps-mobile-tablet-computer/product/20983888/ring-video-doorbell-home-security-surveillance-system-community-social-media-crime-information-sharing-app-neighborhoods https://www.officer.com/command-hq/technology/computers-soft...
_r3e4 8y ago
Here is an example of Ring partnering with a police department - Orlando - to offer discounted video surveillance IoT devices to citizens, with caveat that they can share their videos with cops to fight crime. Orlando police department was called out for civil rights violations when they partnered with Amazon's facial recognition technology. The thing about Ring is it's marketed to consumers as a cheap camera....not a hard core image processing face rec AI tool for policing built by Ukraine's biggest tech company. Every single security article you read about Ukraine's cyber attacks warns about IoT and russian intelligence officials penetrating the private sector. Do american police forces even care about the vulnerability of having this portal app on their phones? Again, nothing is encrypted. https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/orange/os-orlando-ring-doorbell-20180501-story.html https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/orange/os-orlando-ring-...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- tossimba 8y ago
  What do you mean by nothing is encrypted? Transport encryption?
- fixermark 8y ago
  So you mean the discount is for the hardware under the assumption that the users will consent, not actually direct compensation for sending data to the police?
Kocrachon 8y ago
Isn't this an opt in feature? I understand free reign police surveillance is bad, but if a customer opts in, I don't see the issue?
- fromthestart 8y ago
  My neighbor has such a doorbell. My facial data is captured every time I come over or walk by with my dog. When was I given an opportunity to consent to this?
  - gjmarsh 8y ago
    You effectively consent to the possibility of surveillance every time you go outside your home, office, or anywhere with a "reasonable expectation of privacy".
    - epicide 8y ago
      Surveillance is not always mass surveillance. CCTVs are one thing. Giant companies and government entities automating the tracking of people in other countries is another.
  - 15155 8y ago
    In the United States, your consent is not needed to film you in places with no expectation of privacy.
    - eeZah7Ux 8y ago
      False. It depends on how invasive the recording was, how recognizable you are and how the recording is used (e.g. using it for advertising).
      - arbie 8y ago
        Is there a source for this claim? In major cities, there are multiple cameras at every traffic light intersection, and some even focus on the pedestrian crossing.
strittmatter 8y ago
I really dislike this. I bought Ring so I can better track when packages arrive at my door and to use as a digital peephole since my door did not have one. This was prior to the Amazon acquisition, I never would have bought it had I known they were going to own it. I'm sure Ring has had this up their sleeves for a while, but I really don't trust them, the police, and especially Amazon with the data. Pretty soon they will start selling live feeds of everyones device. Save time patrolling the streets with our neighborhood ring live crime watch. Additionally with Amazon I'm sure they track when I come and go from my house, who knows, they'll probably start pushing me shopping ads based on what I'm wearing that day. Not to mention it has built in voice recording.
secabeen 8y ago
This seems fairly reasonable, as long as they keep the commitment that officers have to request videos from camera owners. Now, in theory, the PD could subpoena videos from ring without permission, but that's a higher bar than this.
- rayvy 8y ago
  Your statement reads in a pretty funny way: > This seems fairly reasonable... > ...as long as they keep the commitment... I mean, I feel as if everything seems reasonable as long as the original commitment is kept. Thing is, the original commitment is rarely if ever kept at all. This is nothing more than a problem waiting to happen, as are most things where large bureaucracies involve themselves. Once I read that the data is completely unencrypted (oh, I can do a man-in-the middle and just send my own backend a copy of this video stream? awesome!) and anyone's face (i.e., those simply walking by) could potentially be recorded, I pretty much gave up any hope of this working responsibly. But hey, just read another comment about Walmart apparently sending surveillance video to the Feds (which sounds like a very Walmart thing to do actually), so apparently we have larger issues to deal with.
  - adrr 8y ago
    If I was Amazon or any other security cam company, my biggest fear would be government using my equipment to spy on customers. Because if that ever became public, it would kill adoption. If I was Amazon, I'd be lobbying to codify protections against warrantless surveillance and mass pulls of data.
    - jschwartzi 8y ago
      Why not just design a system where you do not have access to the data? Using symmetric encryption it's possible for you to create a system where only the end customer can decrypt any of the data. Because of the mathematics involved it's effectively impossible for you to respond to a subpoena and law enforcement must make requests of each customer individually.
pfschell 8y ago
Just another example of the utter amorality of the silicon valley mindset–which has been exported globally. Everybody cares about what they can achieve technically, while virtually no one cares whether they should or not.
codezero 8y ago
Something similar to this which I think has gone totally unreported is that large chains like Walmart are feeding their security cameras in real-time to the US government, which is being used to find and track wanted criminals. Edit: Most of the above is speculation based on stuff I've been observing over the past few years. I don't have any evidence that the system exists, or that it is real-time.
- adventured 8y ago
  Do you have substantive links supporting that real-time claim?
  - En_gr_Student 8y ago
    Also, cities do it. They have real-time feeds from traffic cams. Phoenix comes to mind. Every big-block, every direction at the intersection, relatively high resolution realtime video feed.
  - codezero 8y ago
    Nope, I'm making some assumptions, I'll edit my comment to that effect. This came to my attention when a news article about an abduction mentioned he was caught on Walmart security cameras. Usually these are tied to a credit card purchase, but this person was said to have paid in cash, so it piqued my interest. There's also a huge settlement Walmart had with the US government that was quickly followed by a big improvement in their security systems. I'm getting real close to tin-foil hat territory, and I acknowledge that :)
happyringuser 8y ago
I use the Ring security system at home and own a couple of the cameras. The security "history" feature is dirt simple but very cool -- I can trivially see when I use different doors in my house. The Ring smartphone app also shows me the Neighbors view for my area, which is very similar to this product being advertised here (a feed of locations, comments, and videos posted by smart device owners and others). I think probably every software company of a certain size builds a law enforcement portal, very standard feature. My favorite part about the Ring Neighbors section of the app is that it provides clear evidence of widespread lawbreaking by people who have voluntarily disclosed their identities. Specifically, Ring's cameras automatically record audio and cannot be configured to disable the audio recording. (I e-mailed their founder a while back and he said "soon" they'll ship a way to disable this.) In my jurisdiction, audio recording without the consent of all people who are recorded is illegal. Disclosing an illegally made audio recording is another, separate crime. The law in my jurisdiction is extremely clear: if you do not have the consent of all parties and you disclose the recording; the maximum jail term is two years. Merely putting up a sign that says "there is a camera recording the street near my house and if you walk in front of it I'll be audio recording you" does not count as obtaining consent -- everyone actually has to acknowledge that they knew they were being audio recorded. Now, police are free to choose not to arrest people for committing this crime. And prosecutors are free to choose not to prosecute people who break the law in this way. This crime is actually prosecuted, albeit rarely (I think). But … sometimes the crime is prosecuted because people complain that they were wiretapped. One of the reasons we want to set up security cameras is there's someone we're afraid of who has threatened to harass us in the past and we want to know they aren't coming around. If they came by our house, saw that we had Ring cameras, and talked in front of them, they could actually complain to local police that we are wiretapping them, and this would at the last cause us a major headache. So while we own some Ring cameras, we are afraid to use them. Meanwhile, by using the Ring cameras in their standard configuration, and by sharing videos with the Neighbors feature, people are often explicitly committing a crime. And by signing up for Ring accounts and in many cases paying Ring money, people are making it easy to tie their identities to the crime. This Neighbors law enforcement portal gives police a simple, handy map of all the people in my area who are breaking the law in a major way. They aren't using it yet. If they ever decide to step up enforcement of this law, they will have a handy pool of targets.
alphabettsy 8y ago
Can’t say why this feels strange, but’s it’s also not as sensational as the title. Ring Users have to choose to share the information. As someone who has a Ring device, I find the neighborhood feature more a nuisance than anything. It’s mostly people posting videos from their doorbell cams asking if anyone knows why’s the guy with a clipboard was at their door, or posting videos of “suspicious” people in their neighborhood without any crime to report. Not hard to guess what the “suspicious” people shared usually look like. Before these cameras lots of people knocked on your door while you were at work at you never knew.
- jaxtellerSoA 8y ago
  > Ring Users have to choose to share the information. According to user emcarey: >There is no encryption If /u/emcarey is correct (haven't verified this), then the fact that you have "choose to share" is a moot point, the data is out there for anyone to see.
- zepto 8y ago
  Did you miss the part about facial recognition and suspicious activity detection?
  - alphabettsy 8y ago
    Where? The OP combines a Amazon Facial Recognition controversy with Ring Video, which they did just acquire, but provides nothing to support the claim that the information is somehow connected. The OP also makes the inflated claim saying it will offer facial recognition, when the video actually says person recognition. This is something Nest and other systems have offered for years. Person recognition ensures your system isn’t recording pets or squirrels in your yard and instead records actions by actual people. If you want something to worry about, Nest is actually offering the ability to recognize different people, powered by Google of course.
    - zepto 8y ago
      I agree that Nest is similarly worrying, and has been providing surveillance footage to law enforcement too.
En_gr_Student 8y ago
Trippy. So what google is offering in China might already be for sale by Amazon here in the US.
goshx 8y ago
I'd love to have this. It's certainly a lot easier than the process that I had to go through asking my neighbors to check their cameras for a mail thief (which police and postal inspectors didn't even bother to request).
synaesthesisx 8y ago
Nextdoor is going to have a ball with this one
- sodosopa 8y ago
  If most Nextdoor members understood the implications, it would be great. But most people have no problem giving away their information.
will_brown 8y ago
There is significant room for private policing in this space. This past Saturday I went for my run at approximately 9:45AM, on my run I got a text from my bank of suspicious activity on both my credit and debit card for a total of $1,000. When I got back to my car it all made sense as my passenger window was smashed and my “run bag” with my keys and wallet stolen. By the time I the cops got there for the report, I spoke to the bank located the time/store (footlocker) the cards were used, I had spoken with the store manager and confirmed 2 men used multiple cards that were declined and confirmed the store had video but the request must be made through HQ. The cops dont follow up on this and request the video and footlocker won’t give it to me. I know I could go to the store and grease the wheel to get a copy of the video (which I may do). It’s so crazy because no one care more than the victim of crimes to see the criminals face justice, and the technology is in place for things like stolen credit cards or stolen phones but then corporate America gets in the way. I’d love to have a public platform where victims of crimes could force corporations to playall and publish the facts of these cases and crowdsource the identity of the criminals. Any advice?
- fixermark 8y ago
  > I’d love to have a public platform where victims of crimes could force corporations to playall and publish the facts of these cases and crowdsource the identity of the criminals. Any advice? I believe you're thinking of the "discovery" phase of a lawsuit.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > I’d love to have a public platform where victims of crimes could force corporations to playall and publish the facts of these cases and crowdsource the identity of the criminals. Any advice? Well, it's not exactly crowdsourcing, but the “private injured parties force corporations (or anyone else) to play ball and provide factual evidence related to the identity of wrongdoers” facility exists, and is called “the civil courts”. File a John Doe lawsuit. Identify the entity in possession of evidence useful for identifying the actual perpetrator and issue a subpoena to that party for the evidence. (You might recognize this from how media companies go after copyright pirates with IP information, but the same can be done for other civil offenses, too.) You can also publish, in any medium, a request for people to voluntarily provide information for the crowdsourcing part; I'm not sure a special platform helps since you then depend on the informants not only being willing to provide info but being reachable via a dedicated purpose-specific platform, and who is going to do that in advance?
sitkack 8y ago
The majority of people who I know who have all encompassing security systems are conservative and xenophobic. This system is ripe for abuse by racists and racist organizations. When private camera systems feed into state power, some very bad things are setup to occur.
- dsl 8y ago
  You should really expand your circle of friends beyond conservatives and xenophobics. Most of the people I know who have cameras use them to make sure their kids get home safe on time, or keep an eye on the dog in the backyard.
  - justtopost 8y ago
    So we went from people yu know to friends just so you could virtue signal that racists are bad? Good job internet strawman warrior! Seriously, the intent makes it no less creepy when we become surveiled. 'For the children' is a well worn cliche for erosion of rights.
  - sitkack 8y ago
    That is an uncharitable, low-comprehension reading of my first sentence. Didn't say they were friends, and the phrase "all encompassing", isn't for the folks looking after the dog.
conatus 8y ago
This at Medium seems relevant from an Amazon employee on the facial recognition aspect of this. https://medium.com/s/story/im-an-amazon-employee-my-company-shouldn-t-sell-facial-recognition-tech-to-police-36b5fde934ac https://medium.com/s/story/im-an-amazon-employee-my-company-...
jellicle 8y ago
I see a lot of comments about how this is "opt-in". By definition, all of the videos that officers can see the existence of through this portal exist on Ring's servers, not on some individually-owned machine. So if you decline to "share" your video with the police, they can just request it from Ring, who won't and can't decline to share. You won't be notified.
sitkack 8y ago
Nice, efficient, low-friction slide into fascism.
- kevin_thibedeau 8y ago
  A ring for every room citizen.
  - reaperducer 8y ago
    After all, if you've got nothing to hide, why wouldn't you let the police watch a video feed from inside your house? You don't have anything to hide, do you, citizen? /s
- rayvy 8y ago
  > "Nice, efficient, low-friction" ^ Completely adequate description - especially low-friction Won't need to force people to do something they'll willingly do themselves (e.g., police each other via their ignorance in regards to IoT devices and their use)
ndespres 8y ago
I can not imagine developing this and thinking that it is Good. This type of product and platform completely ignores the reality of how it will be used and how police behave in American society. In the demo video, their example has someone sharing a photo of "suspicious people" walking around outside their house, and has neighbors commenting "oh no!" on it. Now the police are alerted to this "crime" which may not even be a crime. Anyone who has an account on NextDoor knows the hysteria around a minor event like a car that someone doesn't recognize being in the neighborhood. The next step is police or homeowner arresting or shooting someone captured on video and posted to this social feed as having committed a crime. The developers, marketers, SV investors, etc who promote this type of surveillance as a good idea need a course in ethics and reality.
- logfromblammo 8y ago
  This would make it so much easier for the neighborhood nosybody to report dark people walking around in a light people neighborhood. See something racial; say something racist. The television commercials for Ring are ridiculous. They act like it's a magical talisman against criminals, who scuttle away like cockroaches under its wary gaze.
- sbr464 8y ago
  I agree completely. It also feel's like the worst part of dystopian by integrating a somewhat clean/modern UI, almost like an SNL commercial for a SaaS platform.
- reaperducer 8y ago
  Anyone who has an account on NextDoor knows the hysteria around a minor event like a car that someone doesn't recognize being in the neighborhood. Happened to me. I saw myself in a Nextdoor video as someone "suspicious," followed pleas from the homeowner and a chorus of cabbageheads for more videos from anyone living nearby so they could identify the car I drive. That's what I get for walking through a public park that backs into a group of homes two hours before closing time. The level of paranoia in the suburbs is just off the charts. I can't wait until I can move back to a city like New York or Chicago or Houston, where I can be safe from my neighbors, and only have to worry about the criminals.
djrogers 8y ago
This is not at all what the title makes it sound like - this is merely a portal for law enforcement in to what is in essence a social network feed. There’s nothing to be seen here that isn’t already publicly shared by Ring camera owners - heck, it’s not even stuff that people are sharing privately. People share this stuff on Ring because they want someone to get recognized or caught for committing a crime (or a perceived one).
tlrobinson 8y ago
Anyone can download the Ring app and view this same content. You don't even need to own a Ring device, your phone just needs to geolocate to the area you say you live in.
mattferderer 8y ago
I've argued for a long time, that Nest, Ring, etc., will all become free or highly discounted services soon as long as you're willing to allow them to share the video data. Based on your camera's location they would have tons of valuable data about the people who live in that area. Do they go on walks? If so, with who & what. Do they go to nearby stores? I can see coming home & getting ads for "winter clothes" & "dog food" after walking my dog in shorts on a cold day. I'm curious if people who live in more optimal areas would get any additional benefits. Kind of like social media influencers. "Live in a popular metro area? Receive $100/month for installing a camera in your apartment."
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
Spooky23 8y ago
The vertical market solutions are worse. My cities redlight camera system records 24x7 and retains for 30 days. All data is local and the camera is internet accessible.
ryanmarsh 8y ago
Ok so I'm not following the argument that this is for "mass surveillance" as if this is some gov't intrusion. I understand you might not want to be recorded walking through my neighborhood but hear me out... I have several ring cams and their home security system, I'm also part of "ring neighborhoods". I live in a city with a lot of home break ins (we're number 11 in the US for robberies). With the neighborhoods feature I get alerts from my neighbors when they share videos from their ring cams. I haven't yet shared anything but I do comment on shared videos. I have an entirely different camera system on my property which records everything that happens outside my home because I have that right in this state. What I don't understand about this is how is me sharing video clips from my secondary camera system any different than this portal for ring neighborhoods? I'm not seeing the problem here. Lets take it to the extreme... Assuming every home in my neighborhood had ring cams, and you wandered on to someone's personal property, and you were recorded, and they chose to share that video, why is that a problem? This is individual property owners choosing to surveil their property and share that video. We have that right. Furthermore I hope ring is indexing the faces. There's several videos from my neighborhood of people casing homes. They ring the doorbell and when they see no one is home they jiggle the door handle (criminals are stupid, there's a Ring cam right there). Thieves have been recorded breaking into cars and homes but police struggle to identify the individuals. How is us, as home owners and renters, banding together to identify criminals in our neighborhood and willingly sharing that data with police a problem? I'm confused.
- nepeckman 8y ago
  > Furthermore I hope ring is indexing the faces. There's several videos from my neighborhood of people casing homes. They ring the doorbell and when they see no one is home they jiggle the door handle (criminals are stupid, there's a Ring cam right there). Thieves have been recorded breaking into cars and homes but police struggle to identify the individuals. How is us, as home owners and renters, banding together to identify criminals in our neighborhood and willingly sharing that data with police a problem? Can you really not see the potential for issues here? Especially when it will be software making the determination for what constitutes "casing" and "suspicious behavior"? What happens if: I go to visit my friend and get mistakenly labeled as "suspicious" in the Ring network. Later I'm seen walking near the scene of a crime. I'm now a person of interest for no reason. And this is a pretty tame example that doesn't touch on deliberate misuse, ex Ring compiling and selling data on a persons movements throughout the day. There are so many ways this can accidentally and deliberately be misused.
jefe_ 8y ago
A good reminder that with connected devices, your level of privacy is dynamic and can change with a single line of code.
SEJeff 8y ago
This type of stuff is specifically why I bought a Doorbird, which is very privacy conscious and made in Germany. Also, Doorbird has public API docs (it is just a bad http "REST-ish" API): https://www.doorbird.com/api https://www.doorbird.com/api It made it much easier to integrate with Home Assistant: https://www.home-assistant.io/components/doorbird/ https://www.home-assistant.io/components/doorbird/ Bonus points that the Doorbird is of a much higher build quality than the Ring or Ring Pro.
John_KZ 8y ago
I get a "404 That file isn’t here anymore" Error message.
- zyren 8y ago
  Same here. Does anyone have a mirror?
conquistadog 8y ago
Ring customer here. I recently shared a video of crime on my property using the neighborhoods feature. I also downloaded the video to my phone, in order to email a copy of it to cops who asked for it (and apparently don't participate in the portal described here). The offender was subsequently caught thanks to the video, and the cops recovered my property for me. The opt-in is limited to per video shared, as far as I've been led to believe and in my experience. I'd be quite alarmed to learn anyone could access anything I haven't designated without that specific sharing step on my part.
MikeCotton45 8y ago
If you've been scammed or if you are in need of a certified hacker contact this guy Captain Spy on this e-mail address.....captainspyhacker2 @gmailCOM I found him useful when many acknowledge his service and how he had helped them with their hack job on Quora. I got his email and decided to hit him up. His response was fast and quickly I told him what I wanted. He did it earlier than the hours he gave. I got him other jobs; credit score score upgrade, my wife's phone hack, build a site and also clear criminal records and all was a success throughout. You can really trust him for a good captainspyhacker2 @ gmailCOM

281 points by _r3e4 8y ago

I found this dropbox link to Ring's marketing video for Police Departments to use their smart video cameras for mass surveillance. This was made before Amazon acquired them. At the end of the demo the CEO states that their facial recognition search feature will be available soon. This software is made in Ukraine and the hardware is manufactured in China. There was no private company contract bid - Ring is just giving this to cops for free and offering customers a discount for letting their video surveillance from their home / doorbell be shared with the police in this portal. over 50+ local police departments are now partners. There is no encryption. There is no 2FA. There is no legal protection for privacy of citizens face's caught in these cameras and added to their facial recognition algorithms. Ring Ukraine is hiring aggressively, they grew from 10 engineers to 500 in two years. It's one of the top image processing R&D labs in Eastern Europe. Based on their job descriptions.... the facial recognition search being deployed in the police portals of Ring is pretty advanced. for more on Ring Ukraine www.ring-ukraine.com I got this ring marketing video from officer.com / a website for police industry news.

fixermark 8y ago
> Ring is just giving this to cops for free and offering customers a discount for letting their video surveillance from their home / doorbell be shared with the police in this portal That's a hell of a market strategy. Do you have a source on that discount story? Because I'm not able to find one right now.
- reaperducer 8y ago
  Do you have a source on that discount story? Because I'm not able to find one right now. Not the OP, but my neighborhood's Nextdoor message board is filled with both Ring discounts, and pleas from the local PD for people to buy them. I have no proof that they're related, but if the marketing is being done through hyper-targeted methods like this, it might explain why it's not Googleable.
  - fixermark 8y ago
    I think I misunderstood OP's meaning. I though they were claiming the police were paying directly for video signal; it appears police or Ring are offering discounts to get the hardware in the belief that citizens will volunteer the video when the local police need help to stop a crime.
alphabettsy 8y ago
Huh? How did you get something entirely different from the article. The article says police will have access to the neighborhoods law enforcement portal, which only gives them access to public posts of Ring users. The only addition that the law enforcement portal appears to give is the fact that they can request video clips from homeowners. There are some valid concerns there but you’re mischaracterizing this tool and how it works.
Someone1234 8y ago
> There is no encryption. There is no 2FA. There is no legal protection for privacy of citizens face's caught in these cameras and added to their facial recognition algorithms. Those are some interesting claims. Where is this information sourced from?
- _r3e4 8y ago
  the engineering team
joering2 8y ago
> There is no encryption. There is no 2FA. There is no legal protection for privacy of citizens face's caught in these cameras and added to their facial recognition algorithms. Yes and no lawsuit will be won either. Every judge will strike it based on being in public assumption of lack of privacy. If you walk on public street, don't assume your privacy is protected :(
- monocasa 8y ago
  It's way more complex than that. For instance here the evidence from a webcam filming from a public vantage point was struck down. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/cops-illegally-nailed-webcam-to-utility-pole-for-6-weeks-to-spy-on-house/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/cops-illegally-n... I've also seen SCOTUS rulings that they see a difference between public ancillary recordings, and mass surveillance of all public actions.
  - joering2 8y ago
    Great example +1; however in this example cops assumed Mr. Vargas to commit crime and hence setup cam to watch aka surveillance his property 24/7. Very difference from situation where average citizens records their front yard 24/7 not expecting or assuming a crime will occur, and then having that video being obtained when the crime happens. In other words, this case is about active surveillance, versus Ring cams are more passive (record everything all the time for no specific reason)
    - balls187 8y ago
      Ring is marketed as a security camera, and one of it's primary use cases is providing video recording in the event of a crime.
      - joering2 8y ago
        Exactly! Not marketed as a tool to surveillance your neighbor 24/7.
- 8y ago
chaostheory 8y ago
I'm a Ring customer. The Ring Portal is optional and opt-in. People want this. This is similar but not the same as Yc's Flock https://www.flocksafety.com/ https://www.flocksafety.com/ but it doesn't require a home owner's association to set up and it's inexpensive. (Flock focuses on storing license plates.) Stuff like this helps police do something about robberies and burglaries. It's harder to ignore and file away when there's video evidence. Megapixel IP cameras are getting cheaper and cheaper every day. We already live in a mass surveillance society with microphones and cameras in almost all of our rooms, with some people even installing Echos in their bathrooms. Instead of bad Big Brother, we get helpful Little Sister (Alexa, Siri, Kortana, ...). imo The only real way to completely escape it, is to avoid technology and live outside of large metros; away from civilization
- kakarot 8y ago
  > The only real way to completely escape it, is to avoid technology and live outside of large metros; away from civilization This is an incredibly subservient, defeatist attitude. I do not allow devices like Alexa into my home. I do not own a smart TV. Besides studio recording equipment, the only microphone in my house is on my phone. If I have my own cameras, and a burglary takes place, I will share that part of the video with the local police. Letting them just hook in is positively insane. Saying it's OK to let Big Brother into my house on the basis of fear and because Little Sister is already there is not only completely irrational, but cowardly as well. As the saying goes, "He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security."
  - chaostheory 8y ago
    > This is an incredibly subservient, defeatist attitude. It's reality if you use a smart phone or own a tablet, or are around others that do. Do your friends and family own one? Do you not own and use a smart phone? You know the device that tracks your location and pushes your data to the cloud. Pretending that doesn't exist is just another instance of cognitive dissonance. Besides what happens when people take a picture of you? They post it to the cloud along with datetime and location data, and even names. A lot of people who value convenience above all do not realize what they are trading it for. Many of these people don't even realize that's what they value most. It's hard not to be in that category if you use almost any kind of cloud connected service. I'm only making blissfully ignorant people aware of it. Maybe you should reexamine the digital aspect of your own life before strongly judging me. > I do not allow devices like Alexa into my home. What about Siri, Google, or Kortana? Siri is on both iPhones and Macs now. Kortana is on every Win 10 machine. Google Assistant / Ok Google is on Chrome OS and Android. Do you own any IoT device? Even if they don't have a mic or camera, they can still track you and your habits. > "He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security." I'm not sure how I've traded my liberty on this one. It's not like I voted for a Patriot Act, where I don't have a choice on what I'm willing to share. > Letting them just hook in is positively insane. If I have my own cameras, and a burglary takes place, I will share that part of the video with the local police. They don't "hook in". It's just NextDoor for Ring owners where it's easier to share video with other Ring owners and now police. You CAN pick and choose what you want to share on Ring Neighborhood. That's how it works. Again no one is forced to even join Ring Neighborhood and you pick and choose what you want to share. Most importantly, even after you join - you can opt out at anytime. People now have a better chance of getting police to deal with people who steal their packages.
zyren 8y ago
do you have a mirror to this? video has been taken down.
- zyren 8y ago
  found a mirror: https://vimeo.com/290482418 https://vimeo.com/290482418
conanbatt 8y ago
No encryption? You can siphon the videos from the ring device by just connecting on the same wifi? The concerns of allowing a surveillance state are real. I hope Jamie addresses all these concerns.

_r3e4 8y ago

original article with link to marketing video dropbox https://www.officer.com/command-hq/technology/computers-software/apps-mobile-tablet-computer/product/20983888/ring-video-doorbell-home-security-surveillance-system-community-social-media-crime-information-sharing-app-neighborhoods https://www.officer.com/command-hq/technology/computers-soft...

_r3e4 8y ago

Here is an example of Ring partnering with a police department - Orlando - to offer discounted video surveillance IoT devices to citizens, with caveat that they can share their videos with cops to fight crime. Orlando police department was called out for civil rights violations when they partnered with Amazon's facial recognition technology. The thing about Ring is it's marketed to consumers as a cheap camera....not a hard core image processing face rec AI tool for policing built by Ukraine's biggest tech company. Every single security article you read about Ukraine's cyber attacks warns about IoT and russian intelligence officials penetrating the private sector. Do american police forces even care about the vulnerability of having this portal app on their phones? Again, nothing is encrypted. https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/orange/os-orlando-ring-doorbell-20180501-story.html https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/orange/os-orlando-ring-...

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
tossimba 8y ago
What do you mean by nothing is encrypted? Transport encryption?
fixermark 8y ago
So you mean the discount is for the hardware under the assumption that the users will consent, not actually direct compensation for sending data to the police?

Kocrachon 8y ago

Isn't this an opt in feature? I understand free reign police surveillance is bad, but if a customer opts in, I don't see the issue?

fromthestart 8y ago
My neighbor has such a doorbell. My facial data is captured every time I come over or walk by with my dog. When was I given an opportunity to consent to this?
- gjmarsh 8y ago
  You effectively consent to the possibility of surveillance every time you go outside your home, office, or anywhere with a "reasonable expectation of privacy".
  - epicide 8y ago
    Surveillance is not always mass surveillance. CCTVs are one thing. Giant companies and government entities automating the tracking of people in other countries is another.
- 15155 8y ago
  In the United States, your consent is not needed to film you in places with no expectation of privacy.
  - eeZah7Ux 8y ago
    False. It depends on how invasive the recording was, how recognizable you are and how the recording is used (e.g. using it for advertising).
    - arbie 8y ago
      Is there a source for this claim? In major cities, there are multiple cameras at every traffic light intersection, and some even focus on the pedestrian crossing.

strittmatter 8y ago

I really dislike this. I bought Ring so I can better track when packages arrive at my door and to use as a digital peephole since my door did not have one. This was prior to the Amazon acquisition, I never would have bought it had I known they were going to own it. I'm sure Ring has had this up their sleeves for a while, but I really don't trust them, the police, and especially Amazon with the data. Pretty soon they will start selling live feeds of everyones device. Save time patrolling the streets with our neighborhood ring live crime watch. Additionally with Amazon I'm sure they track when I come and go from my house, who knows, they'll probably start pushing me shopping ads based on what I'm wearing that day. Not to mention it has built in voice recording.

secabeen 8y ago

This seems fairly reasonable, as long as they keep the commitment that officers have to request videos from camera owners. Now, in theory, the PD could subpoena videos from ring without permission, but that's a higher bar than this.

rayvy 8y ago
Your statement reads in a pretty funny way: > This seems fairly reasonable... > ...as long as they keep the commitment... I mean, I feel as if everything seems reasonable as long as the original commitment is kept. Thing is, the original commitment is rarely if ever kept at all. This is nothing more than a problem waiting to happen, as are most things where large bureaucracies involve themselves. Once I read that the data is completely unencrypted (oh, I can do a man-in-the middle and just send my own backend a copy of this video stream? awesome!) and anyone's face (i.e., those simply walking by) could potentially be recorded, I pretty much gave up any hope of this working responsibly. But hey, just read another comment about Walmart apparently sending surveillance video to the Feds (which sounds like a very Walmart thing to do actually), so apparently we have larger issues to deal with.
- adrr 8y ago
  If I was Amazon or any other security cam company, my biggest fear would be government using my equipment to spy on customers. Because if that ever became public, it would kill adoption. If I was Amazon, I'd be lobbying to codify protections against warrantless surveillance and mass pulls of data.
  - jschwartzi 8y ago
    Why not just design a system where you do not have access to the data? Using symmetric encryption it's possible for you to create a system where only the end customer can decrypt any of the data. Because of the mathematics involved it's effectively impossible for you to respond to a subpoena and law enforcement must make requests of each customer individually.

pfschell 8y ago

Just another example of the utter amorality of the silicon valley mindset–which has been exported globally. Everybody cares about what they can achieve technically, while virtually no one cares whether they should or not.

codezero 8y ago

Something similar to this which I think has gone totally unreported is that large chains like Walmart are feeding their security cameras in real-time to the US government, which is being used to find and track wanted criminals. Edit: Most of the above is speculation based on stuff I've been observing over the past few years. I don't have any evidence that the system exists, or that it is real-time.

adventured 8y ago
Do you have substantive links supporting that real-time claim?
- En_gr_Student 8y ago
  Also, cities do it. They have real-time feeds from traffic cams. Phoenix comes to mind. Every big-block, every direction at the intersection, relatively high resolution realtime video feed.
- codezero 8y ago
  Nope, I'm making some assumptions, I'll edit my comment to that effect. This came to my attention when a news article about an abduction mentioned he was caught on Walmart security cameras. Usually these are tied to a credit card purchase, but this person was said to have paid in cash, so it piqued my interest. There's also a huge settlement Walmart had with the US government that was quickly followed by a big improvement in their security systems. I'm getting real close to tin-foil hat territory, and I acknowledge that :)

happyringuser 8y ago

I use the Ring security system at home and own a couple of the cameras. The security "history" feature is dirt simple but very cool -- I can trivially see when I use different doors in my house. The Ring smartphone app also shows me the Neighbors view for my area, which is very similar to this product being advertised here (a feed of locations, comments, and videos posted by smart device owners and others). I think probably every software company of a certain size builds a law enforcement portal, very standard feature. My favorite part about the Ring Neighbors section of the app is that it provides clear evidence of widespread lawbreaking by people who have voluntarily disclosed their identities. Specifically, Ring's cameras automatically record audio and cannot be configured to disable the audio recording. (I e-mailed their founder a while back and he said "soon" they'll ship a way to disable this.) In my jurisdiction, audio recording without the consent of all people who are recorded is illegal. Disclosing an illegally made audio recording is another, separate crime. The law in my jurisdiction is extremely clear: if you do not have the consent of all parties and you disclose the recording; the maximum jail term is two years. Merely putting up a sign that says "there is a camera recording the street near my house and if you walk in front of it I'll be audio recording you" does not count as obtaining consent -- everyone actually has to acknowledge that they knew they were being audio recorded. Now, police are free to choose not to arrest people for committing this crime. And prosecutors are free to choose not to prosecute people who break the law in this way. This crime is actually prosecuted, albeit rarely (I think). But … sometimes the crime is prosecuted because people complain that they were wiretapped. One of the reasons we want to set up security cameras is there's someone we're afraid of who has threatened to harass us in the past and we want to know they aren't coming around. If they came by our house, saw that we had Ring cameras, and talked in front of them, they could actually complain to local police that we are wiretapping them, and this would at the last cause us a major headache. So while we own some Ring cameras, we are afraid to use them. Meanwhile, by using the Ring cameras in their standard configuration, and by sharing videos with the Neighbors feature, people are often explicitly committing a crime. And by signing up for Ring accounts and in many cases paying Ring money, people are making it easy to tie their identities to the crime. This Neighbors law enforcement portal gives police a simple, handy map of all the people in my area who are breaking the law in a major way. They aren't using it yet. If they ever decide to step up enforcement of this law, they will have a handy pool of targets.

alphabettsy 8y ago

Can’t say why this feels strange, but’s it’s also not as sensational as the title. Ring Users have to choose to share the information. As someone who has a Ring device, I find the neighborhood feature more a nuisance than anything. It’s mostly people posting videos from their doorbell cams asking if anyone knows why’s the guy with a clipboard was at their door, or posting videos of “suspicious” people in their neighborhood without any crime to report. Not hard to guess what the “suspicious” people shared usually look like. Before these cameras lots of people knocked on your door while you were at work at you never knew.

jaxtellerSoA 8y ago
> Ring Users have to choose to share the information. According to user emcarey: >There is no encryption If /u/emcarey is correct (haven't verified this), then the fact that you have "choose to share" is a moot point, the data is out there for anyone to see.
zepto 8y ago
Did you miss the part about facial recognition and suspicious activity detection?
- alphabettsy 8y ago
  Where? The OP combines a Amazon Facial Recognition controversy with Ring Video, which they did just acquire, but provides nothing to support the claim that the information is somehow connected. The OP also makes the inflated claim saying it will offer facial recognition, when the video actually says person recognition. This is something Nest and other systems have offered for years. Person recognition ensures your system isn’t recording pets or squirrels in your yard and instead records actions by actual people. If you want something to worry about, Nest is actually offering the ability to recognize different people, powered by Google of course.
  - zepto 8y ago
    I agree that Nest is similarly worrying, and has been providing surveillance footage to law enforcement too.

En_gr_Student 8y ago

Trippy. So what google is offering in China might already be for sale by Amazon here in the US.

goshx 8y ago

I'd love to have this. It's certainly a lot easier than the process that I had to go through asking my neighbors to check their cameras for a mail thief (which police and postal inspectors didn't even bother to request).

synaesthesisx 8y ago

Nextdoor is going to have a ball with this one

sodosopa 8y ago
If most Nextdoor members understood the implications, it would be great. But most people have no problem giving away their information.

will_brown 8y ago

There is significant room for private policing in this space. This past Saturday I went for my run at approximately 9:45AM, on my run I got a text from my bank of suspicious activity on both my credit and debit card for a total of $1,000. When I got back to my car it all made sense as my passenger window was smashed and my “run bag” with my keys and wallet stolen. By the time I the cops got there for the report, I spoke to the bank located the time/store (footlocker) the cards were used, I had spoken with the store manager and confirmed 2 men used multiple cards that were declined and confirmed the store had video but the request must be made through HQ. The cops dont follow up on this and request the video and footlocker won’t give it to me. I know I could go to the store and grease the wheel to get a copy of the video (which I may do). It’s so crazy because no one care more than the victim of crimes to see the criminals face justice, and the technology is in place for things like stolen credit cards or stolen phones but then corporate America gets in the way. I’d love to have a public platform where victims of crimes could force corporations to playall and publish the facts of these cases and crowdsource the identity of the criminals. Any advice?

fixermark 8y ago
> I’d love to have a public platform where victims of crimes could force corporations to playall and publish the facts of these cases and crowdsource the identity of the criminals. Any advice? I believe you're thinking of the "discovery" phase of a lawsuit.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> I’d love to have a public platform where victims of crimes could force corporations to playall and publish the facts of these cases and crowdsource the identity of the criminals. Any advice? Well, it's not exactly crowdsourcing, but the “private injured parties force corporations (or anyone else) to play ball and provide factual evidence related to the identity of wrongdoers” facility exists, and is called “the civil courts”. File a John Doe lawsuit. Identify the entity in possession of evidence useful for identifying the actual perpetrator and issue a subpoena to that party for the evidence. (You might recognize this from how media companies go after copyright pirates with IP information, but the same can be done for other civil offenses, too.) You can also publish, in any medium, a request for people to voluntarily provide information for the crowdsourcing part; I'm not sure a special platform helps since you then depend on the informants not only being willing to provide info but being reachable via a dedicated purpose-specific platform, and who is going to do that in advance?

sitkack 8y ago

The majority of people who I know who have all encompassing security systems are conservative and xenophobic. This system is ripe for abuse by racists and racist organizations. When private camera systems feed into state power, some very bad things are setup to occur.

dsl 8y ago
You should really expand your circle of friends beyond conservatives and xenophobics. Most of the people I know who have cameras use them to make sure their kids get home safe on time, or keep an eye on the dog in the backyard.
- justtopost 8y ago
  So we went from people yu know to friends just so you could virtue signal that racists are bad? Good job internet strawman warrior! Seriously, the intent makes it no less creepy when we become surveiled. 'For the children' is a well worn cliche for erosion of rights.
- sitkack 8y ago
  That is an uncharitable, low-comprehension reading of my first sentence. Didn't say they were friends, and the phrase "all encompassing", isn't for the folks looking after the dog.

conatus 8y ago

This at Medium seems relevant from an Amazon employee on the facial recognition aspect of this. https://medium.com/s/story/im-an-amazon-employee-my-company-shouldn-t-sell-facial-recognition-tech-to-police-36b5fde934ac https://medium.com/s/story/im-an-amazon-employee-my-company-...

jellicle 8y ago

I see a lot of comments about how this is "opt-in". By definition, all of the videos that officers can see the existence of through this portal exist on Ring's servers, not on some individually-owned machine. So if you decline to "share" your video with the police, they can just request it from Ring, who won't and can't decline to share. You won't be notified.

sitkack 8y ago

Nice, efficient, low-friction slide into fascism.

kevin_thibedeau 8y ago
A ring for every room citizen.
- reaperducer 8y ago
  After all, if you've got nothing to hide, why wouldn't you let the police watch a video feed from inside your house? You don't have anything to hide, do you, citizen? /s
rayvy 8y ago
> "Nice, efficient, low-friction" ^ Completely adequate description - especially low-friction Won't need to force people to do something they'll willingly do themselves (e.g., police each other via their ignorance in regards to IoT devices and their use)

ndespres 8y ago

I can not imagine developing this and thinking that it is Good. This type of product and platform completely ignores the reality of how it will be used and how police behave in American society. In the demo video, their example has someone sharing a photo of "suspicious people" walking around outside their house, and has neighbors commenting "oh no!" on it. Now the police are alerted to this "crime" which may not even be a crime. Anyone who has an account on NextDoor knows the hysteria around a minor event like a car that someone doesn't recognize being in the neighborhood. The next step is police or homeowner arresting or shooting someone captured on video and posted to this social feed as having committed a crime. The developers, marketers, SV investors, etc who promote this type of surveillance as a good idea need a course in ethics and reality.

logfromblammo 8y ago
This would make it so much easier for the neighborhood nosybody to report dark people walking around in a light people neighborhood. See something racial; say something racist. The television commercials for Ring are ridiculous. They act like it's a magical talisman against criminals, who scuttle away like cockroaches under its wary gaze.
sbr464 8y ago
I agree completely. It also feel's like the worst part of dystopian by integrating a somewhat clean/modern UI, almost like an SNL commercial for a SaaS platform.
reaperducer 8y ago
Anyone who has an account on NextDoor knows the hysteria around a minor event like a car that someone doesn't recognize being in the neighborhood. Happened to me. I saw myself in a Nextdoor video as someone "suspicious," followed pleas from the homeowner and a chorus of cabbageheads for more videos from anyone living nearby so they could identify the car I drive. That's what I get for walking through a public park that backs into a group of homes two hours before closing time. The level of paranoia in the suburbs is just off the charts. I can't wait until I can move back to a city like New York or Chicago or Houston, where I can be safe from my neighbors, and only have to worry about the criminals.

djrogers 8y ago

This is not at all what the title makes it sound like - this is merely a portal for law enforcement in to what is in essence a social network feed. There’s nothing to be seen here that isn’t already publicly shared by Ring camera owners - heck, it’s not even stuff that people are sharing privately. People share this stuff on Ring because they want someone to get recognized or caught for committing a crime (or a perceived one).

tlrobinson 8y ago

Anyone can download the Ring app and view this same content. You don't even need to own a Ring device, your phone just needs to geolocate to the area you say you live in.

mattferderer 8y ago

I've argued for a long time, that Nest, Ring, etc., will all become free or highly discounted services soon as long as you're willing to allow them to share the video data. Based on your camera's location they would have tons of valuable data about the people who live in that area. Do they go on walks? If so, with who & what. Do they go to nearby stores? I can see coming home & getting ads for "winter clothes" & "dog food" after walking my dog in shorts on a cold day. I'm curious if people who live in more optimal areas would get any additional benefits. Kind of like social media influencers. "Live in a popular metro area? Receive $100/month for installing a camera in your apartment."

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

Spooky23 8y ago

The vertical market solutions are worse. My cities redlight camera system records 24x7 and retains for 30 days. All data is local and the camera is internet accessible.

ryanmarsh 8y ago

Ok so I'm not following the argument that this is for "mass surveillance" as if this is some gov't intrusion. I understand you might not want to be recorded walking through my neighborhood but hear me out... I have several ring cams and their home security system, I'm also part of "ring neighborhoods". I live in a city with a lot of home break ins (we're number 11 in the US for robberies). With the neighborhoods feature I get alerts from my neighbors when they share videos from their ring cams. I haven't yet shared anything but I do comment on shared videos. I have an entirely different camera system on my property which records everything that happens outside my home because I have that right in this state. What I don't understand about this is how is me sharing video clips from my secondary camera system any different than this portal for ring neighborhoods? I'm not seeing the problem here. Lets take it to the extreme... Assuming every home in my neighborhood had ring cams, and you wandered on to someone's personal property, and you were recorded, and they chose to share that video, why is that a problem? This is individual property owners choosing to surveil their property and share that video. We have that right. Furthermore I hope ring is indexing the faces. There's several videos from my neighborhood of people casing homes. They ring the doorbell and when they see no one is home they jiggle the door handle (criminals are stupid, there's a Ring cam right there). Thieves have been recorded breaking into cars and homes but police struggle to identify the individuals. How is us, as home owners and renters, banding together to identify criminals in our neighborhood and willingly sharing that data with police a problem? I'm confused.

nepeckman 8y ago
> Furthermore I hope ring is indexing the faces. There's several videos from my neighborhood of people casing homes. They ring the doorbell and when they see no one is home they jiggle the door handle (criminals are stupid, there's a Ring cam right there). Thieves have been recorded breaking into cars and homes but police struggle to identify the individuals. How is us, as home owners and renters, banding together to identify criminals in our neighborhood and willingly sharing that data with police a problem? Can you really not see the potential for issues here? Especially when it will be software making the determination for what constitutes "casing" and "suspicious behavior"? What happens if: I go to visit my friend and get mistakenly labeled as "suspicious" in the Ring network. Later I'm seen walking near the scene of a crime. I'm now a person of interest for no reason. And this is a pretty tame example that doesn't touch on deliberate misuse, ex Ring compiling and selling data on a persons movements throughout the day. There are so many ways this can accidentally and deliberately be misused.

jefe_ 8y ago

A good reminder that with connected devices, your level of privacy is dynamic and can change with a single line of code.

SEJeff 8y ago

This type of stuff is specifically why I bought a Doorbird, which is very privacy conscious and made in Germany. Also, Doorbird has public API docs (it is just a bad http "REST-ish" API): https://www.doorbird.com/api https://www.doorbird.com/api It made it much easier to integrate with Home Assistant: https://www.home-assistant.io/components/doorbird/ https://www.home-assistant.io/components/doorbird/ Bonus points that the Doorbird is of a much higher build quality than the Ring or Ring Pro.

John_KZ 8y ago

I get a "404 That file isn’t here anymore" Error message.

zyren 8y ago
Same here. Does anyone have a mirror?

conquistadog 8y ago

Ring customer here. I recently shared a video of crime on my property using the neighborhoods feature. I also downloaded the video to my phone, in order to email a copy of it to cops who asked for it (and apparently don't participate in the portal described here). The offender was subsequently caught thanks to the video, and the cops recovered my property for me. The opt-in is limited to per video shared, as far as I've been led to believe and in my experience. I'd be quite alarmed to learn anyone could access anything I haven't designated without that specific sharing step on my part.

MikeCotton45 8y ago

If you've been scammed or if you are in need of a certified hacker contact this guy Captain Spy on this e-mail address.....captainspyhacker2 @gmailCOM I found him useful when many acknowledge his service and how he had helped them with their hack job on Quora. I got his email and decided to hit him up. His response was fast and quickly I told him what I wanted. He did it earlier than the hours he gave. I got him other jobs; credit score score upgrade, my wife's phone hack, build a site and also clear criminal records and all was a success throughout. You can really trust him for a good captainspyhacker2 @ gmailCOM