this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2024
308 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

76271 readers
2658 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
308
More Police Are Using Your Cameras for Video Evidence (www.themarshallproject.org)
submitted 2 years ago by gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
37 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Private security footage is nothing new to criminal investigations, but two factors are rapidly changing the landscape: huge growth in the number of devices with cameras, and the fact that footage usually lands in a cloud server, rather than on a tape.

When a third party maintains the footage on the cloud, it gives police the ability to seek the images directly from the storage company, rather than from the resident or business owner who controls the recording device. In 2022, the Ring security company, owned by Amazon, admitted that it had provided audio and video from customer doorbells to police without user consent at least 11 times. The company cited “exigent circumstances.”

Archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20240116132800/https://www.themarshallproject.org/2024/01/13/police-video-surveillance-california

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FinishingDutch@lemmy.world 21 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You should always assume any camera to be hostile, unless you have full and complete control over all related software and connections.

Basically, the people who supplied the device will always have more control over it than you do. And big tech just looooves to abuse that and/or cave in to pressure from governments and police agencies.

[–] DaDragon@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Sadly there’s little option for some stuff. Robot vacuums have become super useful, even if they are arguably the biggest security risk that exists. And that will never change, no matter how capable the products get

[–] FinishingDutch@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Why would you consider robot vacuums to be particularly dangerous in terms of security? I’m certainly more weary of things like Google Nest, Amazon Alexa, pet cams, doorbell cams, that sort of thing.

I know that some but not all vacuums have cameras, and I’d assume some might have microphones as well. But in general it doesn’t strike me as inherently more dangerous to one’s privacy.