4 ms·
As an — I am guessing — American, you should feel more comfortable with handing over your domestic surveillance to Russia or China than to a US-based company. T
by necovek 3mo ago
As an — I am guessing — American, you should feel more comfortable with handing over your domestic surveillance to Russia or China than to a US-based company. They absolutely have no interest in your domestic matters, nor do they have a clear path to monetize your attention.
There are non-IP cameras and coax interfaces, which would expose a USB video device on any Linux system, RPi included.
Plenty of software to handle that, though don't know what's the state of the art.
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- Telemakhos 3mo agoWhy should I want to hand mu domestic surveillance over to any company? Why wouldn’t I prefer a private solution that lets me host my own data?
- necovek 3mo agoBeing more comfortable with a foreign company compared to a domestic one does not suggest you should be comfortable with either ;)
- shakna 3mo ago> They absolutely have no interest in your domestic matters This is categorically, not true, I'm afraid. Reaching into domestic networks, where you can find influential people through mass harvesting, is an actively exploited technique by the spy agencies of our world. How do you find the gardener of someone influential? You target all gardeners.
- necovek 3mo agoWe are talking here about someone at least technically savvy who would know if they are of interest or not (ok, maybe not). They'd also be able to monitor their outgoing traffic. We are also not talking about a potential Russian product that will reach into large number of homes since — being paid and privacy focused — it is already a niche product. So getting into someone's home of interest would need a lot of luck, and there are probably better ways to do it.
- shakna 3mo agoThe current observed strategy, broadcast by ASIO chief Mike Burgess, in 2025, is "if there is a way in, use it". Being niche is not a defense. Being a nobody is not a defense. Every product is useful in some way. Targeting everyone, rather than some, is precisely how America's government networks were breached. Everyone is of interest. Because everyone is connected to someone else. Six degrees of separation, or the real world equivalent, means that everyone provides a soft target for achieving access to someone else. There are better, more targeted approaches. Which is why both are done. One doesn't preclude the other.
- mschuster91 3mo ago> As an — I am guessing — American, you should feel more comfortable with handing over your domestic surveillance to Russia or China than to a US-based company. They absolutely have no interest in your domestic matters, nor do they have a clear path to monetize your attention. Unfortunately, that isn't exactly true. Sure, they don't have any usage for your porch camera and its data, but the fact that it is hooked up to an IP classified as "US residential" or "US small-business" is the valuable thing. DDoS nodes, "residential IP proxy" malware or running botnet campaigns all benefit from a high bandwidth connection that is 99% not getting flagged in any list.
- necovek 3mo agoThat is certainly a different matter: "handing over domestic surveillance" vs enabling a foreign company to run a node on your network. However, that is mostly about trusting or not trusting someone's business. Eg. DJI drones and action cams and gimbals are omnipresent, and they have the potential to do the same when it comes to China. But they also have plenty to gain from building a great product and selling it and not reselling your IP addresses.