4 ms·

Why is it that a smart device (robovacuum or proximity sensor etc) etc require the same technology as a streaming webcam? In other words, are there any HW-leve

Why is it that a smart device (robovacuum or proximity sensor etc) etc require the same technology as a streaming webcam? In other words, are there any HW-level privacy-preserving CCDs (for lack of a better word) that provide an image in a format that can't be snooped in? Like say, I need an 'image' that I use to detect certain objects - I don't really need a 1920x1080 24bit RGB image @ 30Hz? In fact, with such a mechanism, certain other metrics (performance, better object detection) could also improve in addition to privacy?

teruakohatu 2y ago
Some of them sell it as a feature and let you drive your robovac around like a FPV drone. Hardly worth the spying implications.
gwbas1c 2y ago
> that provide an image in a format that can't be snooped in There's no way to make information that can only be used in the way you want it to. I would assume that the image is handled in software: IE, the vacuum runs software that uses the image as one of its many inputs to decide where to steer the vacuum. Doing this as hardware-only is technically possible, but in practice, it's probably so difficult to implement it that way that it may be impractical. (For example, how can you remotely update the vacuum to fix a bug in the algorithm if it's burned into a chip?) Edit: I should point out that the vacuum is probably using a standard, off-the-shelf, camera part. They could consider figuring out how to blur the image (by manipulating the lens during manufacturing,) but I wouldn't make any assumptions about their algorithms to assert that this is practical.
- textlapse 2y ago
  What I am talking about is a bit different: imagine if the CCD produced a non MxN color image. Maybe think of it as scrambled data that has just the right level of detail for the machine to do its thing but not something where you can get back the full color image via any means. I am not saying the actual CCD is different but it’s something akin to a filter between the HW and the rest of the system to prevent full color image access.
  - wizzwizz4 2y ago
    > Maybe think of it as scrambled data that has just the right level of detail for the machine to do its thing but not something where you can get back the full color image via any means. Information theory says this is impossible. https://anishathalye.com/inverting-photodna/ https://anishathalye.com/inverting-photodna/
    - textlapse 2y ago
      I could imagine an IR or LiDAR like image that is still useful to detect objects or humans but is otherwise indecipherable by a human… Really I think I am imagining homomorphic encryption style techniques.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
  - stavros 2y ago
    The resulting image would be basically useless for navigation. If a human can't make stuff out in the image, a computer definitely won't.
    - strken 2y ago
      Why would that be true? You can do facial recognition on very low resolution photographs that wouldn't be easily recognisable to a human: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0262885619300216 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S02628...
      - gwbas1c 2y ago
        That can be achieved by manipulating the lens to blur the image. A blurry high resolution image is generally equivalent to a low resolution image.
    - pbhjpbhj 2y ago
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- Izkata 2y ago
  > I would assume that the image is handled in software: IE, the vacuum runs software that uses the image as one of its many inputs to decide where to steer the vacuum. They mainly use lidar for navigating the room, the front camera is to help identify obstacles so they're not run over. They also advertise using the camera and a two-way microphone with remote control through the app, so you can look around your home or talk to your pets while you're away.
fwip 2y ago
You could try smearing Vaseline on the lens.
bigiain 2y ago
Back when I was playing with DIY Drones, there were a bunch of projects using optical mouse sensors to do visual position hold at low altitudes. There was a fairly well known way to swap out the lens, then you'd get a 16x16 or 32x32 pixel "image" stream, which was good enough to do feature detection and at the same time made that feature detection way less computationally expensive than hi resolution video feeds. I strongly suspect anything a robot vac does with cameras could easily be done with super low resolution sensors. Even if you needed to put 2 of them in stereo to get depth perception that maybe you could compute from HD video.

teruakohatu 2y ago

Some of them sell it as a feature and let you drive your robovac around like a FPV drone. Hardly worth the spying implications.

gwbas1c 2y ago

> that provide an image in a format that can't be snooped in There's no way to make information that can only be used in the way you want it to. I would assume that the image is handled in software: IE, the vacuum runs software that uses the image as one of its many inputs to decide where to steer the vacuum. Doing this as hardware-only is technically possible, but in practice, it's probably so difficult to implement it that way that it may be impractical. (For example, how can you remotely update the vacuum to fix a bug in the algorithm if it's burned into a chip?) Edit: I should point out that the vacuum is probably using a standard, off-the-shelf, camera part. They could consider figuring out how to blur the image (by manipulating the lens during manufacturing,) but I wouldn't make any assumptions about their algorithms to assert that this is practical.

textlapse 2y ago
What I am talking about is a bit different: imagine if the CCD produced a non MxN color image. Maybe think of it as scrambled data that has just the right level of detail for the machine to do its thing but not something where you can get back the full color image via any means. I am not saying the actual CCD is different but it’s something akin to a filter between the HW and the rest of the system to prevent full color image access.
- wizzwizz4 2y ago
  > Maybe think of it as scrambled data that has just the right level of detail for the machine to do its thing but not something where you can get back the full color image via any means. Information theory says this is impossible. https://anishathalye.com/inverting-photodna/ https://anishathalye.com/inverting-photodna/
  - textlapse 2y ago
    I could imagine an IR or LiDAR like image that is still useful to detect objects or humans but is otherwise indecipherable by a human… Really I think I am imagining homomorphic encryption style techniques.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
- stavros 2y ago
  The resulting image would be basically useless for navigation. If a human can't make stuff out in the image, a computer definitely won't.
  - strken 2y ago
    Why would that be true? You can do facial recognition on very low resolution photographs that wouldn't be easily recognisable to a human: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0262885619300216 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S02628...
    - gwbas1c 2y ago
      That can be achieved by manipulating the lens to blur the image. A blurry high resolution image is generally equivalent to a low resolution image.
  - pbhjpbhj 2y ago
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
Izkata 2y ago
> I would assume that the image is handled in software: IE, the vacuum runs software that uses the image as one of its many inputs to decide where to steer the vacuum. They mainly use lidar for navigating the room, the front camera is to help identify obstacles so they're not run over. They also advertise using the camera and a two-way microphone with remote control through the app, so you can look around your home or talk to your pets while you're away.

fwip 2y ago

You could try smearing Vaseline on the lens.

bigiain 2y ago

Back when I was playing with DIY Drones, there were a bunch of projects using optical mouse sensors to do visual position hold at low altitudes. There was a fairly well known way to swap out the lens, then you'd get a 16x16 or 32x32 pixel "image" stream, which was good enough to do feature detection and at the same time made that feature detection way less computationally expensive than hi resolution video feeds. I strongly suspect anything a robot vac does with cameras could easily be done with super low resolution sensors. Even if you needed to put 2 of them in stereo to get depth perception that maybe you could compute from HD video.