5 ms·

> Apple’s default setting for their doorbells is end-to-end encryption which means the company is unable to share user video at all Why won’t Google Nest and A

> Apple’s default setting for their doorbells is end-to-end encryption which means the company is unable to share user video at all Why won’t Google Nest and Amazon Ring do this? I have 6 Nest cameras throughout my home ( not the doorbell product)

cinntaile 4y ago
Maybe it makes it harder to analyze and or sell that data to third parties.
- nisegami 4y ago
  Do Amazon and Google sell data to 3rd parties? I always figured they wouldn't because it's literally the core of their value.
  - tomComb 4y ago
    They don’t. As you note, it wouldn’t make any sense for them to do so. It’s one of those perverse things that they are some of the few companies that actually don’t sell user data, and yet they’re the ones that are most frequently accused of it. I don’t think it helps us in keeping big tech companies to account when we spread false information about them.
  - egberts1 4y ago
    Yes. They do and often indirectly through 3rd parties. It is that obvious; It’s pervasive.
  - cmiles74 4y ago
    I'm not convinced that they are simply "giving" the data to law enforcement, it strikes me as much more likely that they are charging them.
EUROCARE 4y ago
> which means the company is unable to share user video at all You said it yourself... How would you analyze the data if it's encrypted?
- nkozyra 4y ago
  On the device itself, perhaps. Video data stored encrypted, metadata not.
ajross 4y ago
Because Apple's HomeKit stuff is significantly inferior. HN privacy nattering aside, consumers clearly want cloud-accessible home surveillance. It's what they pay for. And if you can get to it from that website using only your Amazon or Google account, so can Amazon or Google.
- TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
  How do you access videos from the Apple HomeKit products?
  - solardev 4y ago
    Siri will narrate it frame by frame.
  - endemic 4y ago
    I was actually curious about this. I didn't realize that HomeKit-compatible doorbells existed. The product page for the Logitech Circle View Wired Doorbell (the least expensive listed on apple.com) notes "Receive rich notifications with two-way audio across all your Apple devices whenever a person or package is at the door." So maybe access via PC/web is what's missing?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - oakesm9 4y ago
    HomeKit secure video stores an encrypted video in your iCloud account so you can access it from anywhere. It does require a paid subscription and a hub (HomePod, Apple TV, or iPad) where the hub does the video analysis on device. https://support.apple.com/en-gb/guide/icloud/mme054c72692/1.0/icloud/1.0 https://support.apple.com/en-gb/guide/icloud/mme054c72692/1....
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    In the Home app, on iOS or macOS, or in control center —> HomeKit on Apple TV. https://support.apple.com/guide/icloud/set-up-homekit-secure-video-mm7c90d21583/icloud https://support.apple.com/guide/icloud/set-up-homekit-secure...
prepend 4y ago
I suspect because Google and Amazon want to use the data from the video feeds for their own purposes. I think using it for CV modeling and advertising can make them more money than not using it. Also, they can charge police for these data. I won’t buy their products because of their decision to monetize over privacy. What I find interesting is that their products aren’t cheaper than other privacy preserving products from Wyze and Apple so this extra revenue is pure profit or gravy. This isn’t some essential need of their business model, they just don’t respect user privacy enough to avoid this extra revenue.
- dymk 4y ago
  It’s probably because it’s somewhat more complex to implement encrypted end of end video and storage, with a slightly more complex user experience. So they cut corners, knowing most people don’t care about encryption.
  - nicce 4y ago
    Complexity is not an issue. It a very basic thing to do in these days. UX might be a bigger issue, as it is harder to view this data in any device and still keep keys unaccessible by Google. But still not too hard. People use Whatsapp web in daily basis. Main problem is the ML use for video feed to trigger some stuff etc.
    - dymk 4y ago
      Of course complexity is an issue. If users don't care about E2E encryption, why would Google spend more time implementing an E2E application?
- gh02t 4y ago
  Has Wyze ever provided privacy guarantees on their cloud service? Their privacy policy says they will gladly share data. > In response to a request for information if we believe disclosure is in accordance with, or required by, any applicable law or legal process, including lawful requests by public authorities to meet national security or law enforcement requirements; IANAL but that sure sounds to me like they will provide data in cases where they aren't legally required to (as in a warrant) as long as they believe it's "in accordance with" the law. Which could mean almost anything other than a clearly illegal request. https://www.wyze.com/policies/privacy-policy#c https://www.wyze.com/policies/privacy-policy#c I like Wyze and think they are acting in good faith, but I wouldn't assume they would say no to a request from government/police. They may offer local recording and RTSP, but AFAIK they are still cloud connected unless you otherwise block them or use alternate firmware and hence not private.
JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> Why won’t Google Nest and Amazon Ring do this? Ring says it offers end-to-end encryption [1]. [1] https://blog.ring.com/products-innovation/ring-announces-end-to-end-encryption-privacy-security-and-user-control-updates/ https://blog.ring.com/products-innovation/ring-announces-end...
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  It breaks most of Ring's more compelling features, though.
seanmcdirmid 4y ago
Probably because of the ML processing (event recognition), which is the only good reason to subscribe to Nest/Google home in the first place. Otherwise, you just have streams of video without much context. If the analysis could be done on device, then that would be a different story. Unfortunately, either Ring or Nest is required in my neighborhood given our property crime issues.
- nktrnk 4y ago
  >> either Ring or Nest is required in my neighborhood given our property crime issues What do you do with that footage? I have a full resolution video of a dude stealing $300 worth of crabbing equipment from my porch. What’s next? Police is not going to do anything about it even though there’s probably technically a way to track him down.
  - seanmcdirmid 4y ago
    The footage isn't that useful. Instead, I use it for real time intevention ("Hey! Get away from my car!") or just awareness that something is going on.
kornhole 4y ago
Maybe this article hints at why. https://www.mintpressnews.com/national-security-search-engine-google-ranks-cia-agents/281490/ https://www.mintpressnews.com/national-security-search-engin...
daveoc64 4y ago
Ring does offer end-to-end encryption, but it breaks various features. You can see a list of what it breaks on their website: https://support.ring.com/hc/en-gb/articles/360054941511-Understanding-video-end-to-end-encryption-E2EE- https://support.ring.com/hc/en-gb/articles/360054941511-Unde... Many of these features are key selling points, so most consumers aren't going to be interested in turning end-to-end encryption on. It also doesn't work on battery-powered devices, presumably because they offload as much work as possible to the server to save power.
cronix 4y ago
Knowing the car your neighbor(s) drive and what times they come and go are very valuable marketing tools, to someone. Just like knowing what they search for and the content of their emails tells them other things about you, and your neighbor who didn't sign up for this service.
edm0nd 4y ago
It sucks with Ring if you enable e2e encryption, they tied it to the ability to have live notification and alerts so you lose that functionality.
- bushbaba 4y ago
  How do you expect Ring to provide live notifications that are processed server side if you enable e2e encryption? If Ring.com can decrypt the data, they can always share the feed with 3rd parties. It's a sensible design choice given the current constraints of the hardware.

cinntaile 4y ago

Maybe it makes it harder to analyze and or sell that data to third parties.

nisegami 4y ago
Do Amazon and Google sell data to 3rd parties? I always figured they wouldn't because it's literally the core of their value.
- tomComb 4y ago
  They don’t. As you note, it wouldn’t make any sense for them to do so. It’s one of those perverse things that they are some of the few companies that actually don’t sell user data, and yet they’re the ones that are most frequently accused of it. I don’t think it helps us in keeping big tech companies to account when we spread false information about them.
- egberts1 4y ago
  Yes. They do and often indirectly through 3rd parties. It is that obvious; It’s pervasive.
- cmiles74 4y ago
  I'm not convinced that they are simply "giving" the data to law enforcement, it strikes me as much more likely that they are charging them.

EUROCARE 4y ago

> which means the company is unable to share user video at all You said it yourself... How would you analyze the data if it's encrypted?

nkozyra 4y ago
On the device itself, perhaps. Video data stored encrypted, metadata not.

ajross 4y ago

Because Apple's HomeKit stuff is significantly inferior. HN privacy nattering aside, consumers clearly want cloud-accessible home surveillance. It's what they pay for. And if you can get to it from that website using only your Amazon or Google account, so can Amazon or Google.

TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
How do you access videos from the Apple HomeKit products?
- solardev 4y ago
  Siri will narrate it frame by frame.
- endemic 4y ago
  I was actually curious about this. I didn't realize that HomeKit-compatible doorbells existed. The product page for the Logitech Circle View Wired Doorbell (the least expensive listed on apple.com) notes "Receive rich notifications with two-way audio across all your Apple devices whenever a person or package is at the door." So maybe access via PC/web is what's missing?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- oakesm9 4y ago
  HomeKit secure video stores an encrypted video in your iCloud account so you can access it from anywhere. It does require a paid subscription and a hub (HomePod, Apple TV, or iPad) where the hub does the video analysis on device. https://support.apple.com/en-gb/guide/icloud/mme054c72692/1.0/icloud/1.0 https://support.apple.com/en-gb/guide/icloud/mme054c72692/1....
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  In the Home app, on iOS or macOS, or in control center —> HomeKit on Apple TV. https://support.apple.com/guide/icloud/set-up-homekit-secure-video-mm7c90d21583/icloud https://support.apple.com/guide/icloud/set-up-homekit-secure...

prepend 4y ago

I suspect because Google and Amazon want to use the data from the video feeds for their own purposes. I think using it for CV modeling and advertising can make them more money than not using it. Also, they can charge police for these data. I won’t buy their products because of their decision to monetize over privacy. What I find interesting is that their products aren’t cheaper than other privacy preserving products from Wyze and Apple so this extra revenue is pure profit or gravy. This isn’t some essential need of their business model, they just don’t respect user privacy enough to avoid this extra revenue.

dymk 4y ago
It’s probably because it’s somewhat more complex to implement encrypted end of end video and storage, with a slightly more complex user experience. So they cut corners, knowing most people don’t care about encryption.
- nicce 4y ago
  Complexity is not an issue. It a very basic thing to do in these days. UX might be a bigger issue, as it is harder to view this data in any device and still keep keys unaccessible by Google. But still not too hard. People use Whatsapp web in daily basis. Main problem is the ML use for video feed to trigger some stuff etc.
  - dymk 4y ago
    Of course complexity is an issue. If users don't care about E2E encryption, why would Google spend more time implementing an E2E application?
gh02t 4y ago
Has Wyze ever provided privacy guarantees on their cloud service? Their privacy policy says they will gladly share data. > In response to a request for information if we believe disclosure is in accordance with, or required by, any applicable law or legal process, including lawful requests by public authorities to meet national security or law enforcement requirements; IANAL but that sure sounds to me like they will provide data in cases where they aren't legally required to (as in a warrant) as long as they believe it's "in accordance with" the law. Which could mean almost anything other than a clearly illegal request. https://www.wyze.com/policies/privacy-policy#c https://www.wyze.com/policies/privacy-policy#c I like Wyze and think they are acting in good faith, but I wouldn't assume they would say no to a request from government/police. They may offer local recording and RTSP, but AFAIK they are still cloud connected unless you otherwise block them or use alternate firmware and hence not private.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> Why won’t Google Nest and Amazon Ring do this? Ring says it offers end-to-end encryption [1]. [1] https://blog.ring.com/products-innovation/ring-announces-end-to-end-encryption-privacy-security-and-user-control-updates/ https://blog.ring.com/products-innovation/ring-announces-end...

ceejayoz 4y ago
It breaks most of Ring's more compelling features, though.

seanmcdirmid 4y ago

Probably because of the ML processing (event recognition), which is the only good reason to subscribe to Nest/Google home in the first place. Otherwise, you just have streams of video without much context. If the analysis could be done on device, then that would be a different story. Unfortunately, either Ring or Nest is required in my neighborhood given our property crime issues.

nktrnk 4y ago
>> either Ring or Nest is required in my neighborhood given our property crime issues What do you do with that footage? I have a full resolution video of a dude stealing $300 worth of crabbing equipment from my porch. What’s next? Police is not going to do anything about it even though there’s probably technically a way to track him down.
- seanmcdirmid 4y ago
  The footage isn't that useful. Instead, I use it for real time intevention ("Hey! Get away from my car!") or just awareness that something is going on.

kornhole 4y ago

Maybe this article hints at why. https://www.mintpressnews.com/national-security-search-engine-google-ranks-cia-agents/281490/ https://www.mintpressnews.com/national-security-search-engin...

daveoc64 4y ago

Ring does offer end-to-end encryption, but it breaks various features. You can see a list of what it breaks on their website: https://support.ring.com/hc/en-gb/articles/360054941511-Understanding-video-end-to-end-encryption-E2EE- https://support.ring.com/hc/en-gb/articles/360054941511-Unde... Many of these features are key selling points, so most consumers aren't going to be interested in turning end-to-end encryption on. It also doesn't work on battery-powered devices, presumably because they offload as much work as possible to the server to save power.

cronix 4y ago

Knowing the car your neighbor(s) drive and what times they come and go are very valuable marketing tools, to someone. Just like knowing what they search for and the content of their emails tells them other things about you, and your neighbor who didn't sign up for this service.

edm0nd 4y ago

It sucks with Ring if you enable e2e encryption, they tied it to the ability to have live notification and alerts so you lose that functionality.

bushbaba 4y ago
How do you expect Ring to provide live notifications that are processed server side if you enable e2e encryption? If Ring.com can decrypt the data, they can always share the feed with 3rd parties. It's a sensible design choice given the current constraints of the hardware.