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

  • DaDragon@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months 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.