Comment on Why are people disconnecting or destroying their Ring cameras?

• captainlezbian@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  The only ones that don’t are ones that only send data to your data storage.

  source

  • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    And even then, big question mark, as most Chinese produced camera modules have black box firmware. If it’s on the Internet it’s not yours.

    source

    • spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      My cameras have local network access only. Most people who are tech savvy enough to set up their own storage are also able to block Internet access for security cameras.

      But another big concern for externally mounted cameras with microsd cards is the confiscation of those cards. They are are very easy to remove, often without tools.

      source

      • frog_brawler@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Which cameras do you use?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• partial_accumen@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  And the NEST camera apparently has some sort of free tier that saves a short amount (the last few hours) of video by default, so NEST users shouldn’t be surprised at all that their video feed is sent to the cloud as its one of the features of the subscription-less model.

  source

  • spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    The problem isn’t that it’s being sent to the cloud, the problem is that it’s not being encrypted and Amazon is doing whatever they fuck they want with it, including giving it to law enforcement without a warrant.

    source

    • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      encryption wouldn’t solve the problem, just raise more questions. how is it encrypted, with what algorithm? was the alg implemented securely? who has the decryption keys? how were the keys generated? were they generated from a good enough entropy source?

      having encryption and “secure!” plastered all over the box and the phone app does not mean anything, especially when you need protection against the manufacturer.

      source

      • spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        When people in this community say “encryption” it should be obvious we’re referring to effective encryption.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • curbstickle@anarchist.nexus ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Just to note here, they are referring to nest which is google.

      source
• Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  A big exception to the rule are the HomeKit secure video cameras that work in Apple’s ecosystem. If your HomeKit compatible camera is going straight into HKSV, and isn’t paired with manufacturer’s own cloud video service, then it’s all E2EE and it can’t be accessed by Apple, even with a warrant.

  Problem is, camera offerings are limited, and scrolling clips in HomeKit is paaaainful. Also, if you’re not in Apple’s ecosystem, you can’t use it.

  source

  • Goodlucksil@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Can’t you get a surveillance camera from anywhere and use that?

    source

    • AA5B@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      They’re pointing out that HomeKit cameras are specifically end to end encrypted and claimed inaccessible. Apple has really been pushing online privacy as a feature

      You can get a camera from anywhere and either use it locally only or implement your own encryption before saving to a cloud resource if you can get one with any expectation of privacy. But you have to do all the work and it is never end to end encrypted

      source

      • cecilkorik@piefed.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Depends on your precise definition of the camera “end” I suppose, but an IP camera absolutely can be and should be end to end encrypted. Even if the camera itself does not support native encryption, at worst the aggregation point/server should. Really, surveillance cameras should be on their own dedicated private IP network anyway, ideally with physical isolation on any wired connections. Besides a physical, on-site attack (which is what the cameras are for!) there really should not be any plausible method of an outside attacker breaching into the non-encrypted part of the network at all.

        And that’s the worst case, real-world scenario. Quite a few cameras do in fact support on-device encryption now so “never” is still definitely incorrect. You do have to do the work though. That’s how good security works, it doesn’t come in a box as much as many wish it would and even if it does it’s never one-size-fits-all.

        source