Airbnb Guest Found Hidden Surveillance Camera By Scanning Wi-Fi Network (arstechnica.com) 99
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: A New Zealand family that booked an Airbnb in Ireland recently discovered an undisclosed camera in the living room, and the family says that Airbnb initially cleared the host of any wrongdoing before finally banning the offender from its platform. "Once the family had unpacked, Andrew Barker, who works in IT security, scanned the house's Wi-Fi network," CNN reported today. "The scan unearthed a camera and subsequently a live feed. From the angle of the video, the family tracked down the camera, concealed in what appeared to be a smoke alarm or carbon monoxide detector." Nealie Barker posted an image on Facebook showing the location of the camera in the living room and a shot of the family from the sneaky video feed.
Based on the photo, the video of the Barkers seems to have been taken on March 3 and was viewable on the local Wi-Fi network at 192.168.0.4/video/livemb.asp. The family relocated to a hotel and contacted both Airbnb and the property host. The host initially hung up but later called back and told them, "The camera in the living room was the only one in the house," CNN wrote. It's not clear whether the host was recording the video, whether he was capturing audio, whether he was monitoring it remotely in real time, or whether he was using it for anything more than monitoring guests. [...] Airbnb temporarily suspended the listing and promised to investigate, CNN wrote. But when Barker contacted Airbnb again two weeks later, "the company told her that the host had been 'exonerated,' and the listing reinstated." Airbnb finally banned the host after Nealie Barker posted about the disturbing incident on Facebook on Monday this week. Barker's Facebook post said that Airbnb's "investigation which didn't include any follow-up with us exonerated the host, no explanation provided," and that "the listing (with hidden camera not mentioned) is still on Airbnb." Airbnb said in a statement to Ars Technica: "Our original handling of this incident did not meet the high standards we set for ourselves, and we have apologized to the family and fully refunded their stay."
Airbnb's policy states that hosts must disclose "any type of surveillance device" in listings, "even if it's not turned on or hooked up." Cameras are allowed in certain spaces if they are disclosed, but Airbnb "prohibit[s] any surveillance devices that are in or that observe the interior of certain private spaces (such as bedrooms and bathrooms) regardless of whether they've been disclosed. [...] If a host discloses the device after booking, Airbnb will allow the guest to cancel the reservation and receive a refund. Host cancellation penalties may apply."
Based on the photo, the video of the Barkers seems to have been taken on March 3 and was viewable on the local Wi-Fi network at 192.168.0.4/video/livemb.asp. The family relocated to a hotel and contacted both Airbnb and the property host. The host initially hung up but later called back and told them, "The camera in the living room was the only one in the house," CNN wrote. It's not clear whether the host was recording the video, whether he was capturing audio, whether he was monitoring it remotely in real time, or whether he was using it for anything more than monitoring guests. [...] Airbnb temporarily suspended the listing and promised to investigate, CNN wrote. But when Barker contacted Airbnb again two weeks later, "the company told her that the host had been 'exonerated,' and the listing reinstated." Airbnb finally banned the host after Nealie Barker posted about the disturbing incident on Facebook on Monday this week. Barker's Facebook post said that Airbnb's "investigation which didn't include any follow-up with us exonerated the host, no explanation provided," and that "the listing (with hidden camera not mentioned) is still on Airbnb." Airbnb said in a statement to Ars Technica: "Our original handling of this incident did not meet the high standards we set for ourselves, and we have apologized to the family and fully refunded their stay."
Airbnb's policy states that hosts must disclose "any type of surveillance device" in listings, "even if it's not turned on or hooked up." Cameras are allowed in certain spaces if they are disclosed, but Airbnb "prohibit[s] any surveillance devices that are in or that observe the interior of certain private spaces (such as bedrooms and bathrooms) regardless of whether they've been disclosed. [...] If a host discloses the device after booking, Airbnb will allow the guest to cancel the reservation and receive a refund. Host cancellation penalties may apply."
Re: Several days old story. (Score:5, Interesting)
Yup, very sad. I also blame things like the mod system. I don't quite understand why I can't mod if I post.
They should give some of us (who want to be positive and contribute) a great deal of mod power / points to quickly clean up the site.
Keep track of who mods who and what and block abusers; but otherwise clean up this site.
Re: Several days old story. (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't quite understand why I can't mod if I post.
That is quite why enough.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't quite understand why I can't mod if I post.
That is quite why enough.
That makes no sense. Care to explain?
On a certain red site I can post and mod same story.
Re: (Score:1)
I don't quite understand why I can't mod if I post.
That is quite why enough.
That makes no sense. Care to explain?
On a certain red site I can post and mod same story.
One (possible) reason: modding-only forces you to step back and not be involved in the conversation. Once someone start commenting, they tend to take a side, and will probably reinforce any posts that agree with them.
Modding-only encourages (in theory) a more neutral outlook since you don't have a dog in the fight. Of course everyone has biases, and they tend to vote for/against certain outlooks, but hopefully a random number of people, the mod points will be spread across varying personalities.
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you for an uncommonly interesting, informative, and useful answer. I'm in NO WAY attacking you or your answer, even though I know people will interpret it that way, and insist I'm attacking. Sigh. Anyway, I understand what you're saying, but I've been observing for years that people seem to think their philosophical imaginations are more real than actual reality. How often I've heard someone say "that shouldn't happen". Turns out reality is different than what many people theorize it should be.
Th
Re: (Score:2)
That's a great way to look at it- I wish I could mod you up. But I'm not asking to referee myself. As I commented above, if I'm interested in a story, I'm interested in both modding and commenting. If I'm not interested, neither. And I take modding seriously and I don't toss mod points around, so if I'm not interested in a topic, I have no business modding- certainly little interest or motivation. Gotta think about it some more, but on RED site you can do both (and I do). Thanks and cheers!
Re: (Score:2)
Like reffing a game you are a player in.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry- my above post was meant for you. My MS mouse has a wonky scroll wheel that occasionally skips up or down, and must have done its dirty work as I was clicking on "reply" and I didn't realize it.
Anyway, I appreciate your reply but it's really not the same thing. All I can say it it's working well on another site. And I have some different ideas for a site like this. Someday...
Re: (Score:2)
No worries.
I once tried running a web forum with no moderation at all. It did not work out well.
Cheers
Re: (Score:3)
I'm with you.. I've been stopping here every day for a long time. Remember when it had great stories, and relevant comments? When a link on slashdot generated so much traffic sites woud post they had the 'slashdot effect'?
Now it is just full of trolls and morons who waste so much of their own time entering the captcha just to post useless crap.
Re: (Score:1)
Slashdot has always been a hotbed for trolls, mostly because of the lack of comment deletion. The site is actually far more restrictive about comments now since a lot of trolling actually does get deleted. That was unthinkable when CmdrTaco ran this site. There have always been really vile comments like the stuff Ralph JewHater Nader [slashdot.org] posted. Discussions were filled with disruptive comments, both logged-in and anonymous ones.
The problem isn't that there are more low quality comments; if anything, there a
Re: (Score:2)
Awesome post. Absolutely agree on all points. Wish I could mod you up. Maybe it's time to start yet another similar site, unless you know of a good one somewhere. And I mean good science and tech with occasional political / other really pertinent news.
"lameness filter"? I wasn't aware there was one. I'll have to learn about it.
If I were to start a site, how would you feel about _limited_ advertising? No moving things ever. No overlays, popups, nothing intrusive ever. Just nice simple static ads in
Re: (Score:2)
Hacker News is very active - I suspect a lot of geeks are there. What does slashdot offer that is truly unique any more (not counting anon coward shenanigans)?
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you! I've avoided most "social media" for, well, 25 years, but it's getting better in some ways and places, the discussions and people here are getting better, and here is now better (IMHO) than the RED site. I'll check out HN. Might just start a site...
Stuff vs Privacy (Score:5, Informative)
When "hosts" leave a bunch of valuable stuff around for their "guests" it's little wonder they care more about protecting their crap than the privacy of the guests.
Stop renting out space that has your stuff in it.
Nothing of value should be in the property, everything should be documented and have proper insurance.
Re:Stuff vs Privacy (Score:5, Insightful)
Airbnb wasn't supposed to be about renting entire spaces. it was meant to be for renting rooms in homes. i.e. you were home to keep things 'safe'. Legislators need to get their shit together and simply rule that renting entire apartments/houses for individual nights means 'hotel' subject to all the local and higher levels of regulation that that involves. Get it back to what it was meant for - stop causing damage to others through the use of a fancy name and a web app to hide your activities. Man up that if you're running a damn business, follow the rules.
Re: (Score:2)
Airbnb wasn't supposed to be about renting entire spaces. it was meant to be for renting rooms in homes. i.e. you were home to keep things 'safe'. Legislators need to get their shit together and simply rule that renting entire apartments/houses for individual nights means 'hotel' subject to all the local and higher levels of regulation that that involves. Get it back to what it was meant for - stop causing damage to others through the use of a fancy name and a web app to hide your activities. Man up that if you're running a damn business, follow the rules.
Many places already have laws like that, but like with Uber, AirBnB have in many places managed to get out of it, because the drivers/landlords are the ones breaking the law not the international organization organizing the crime. And then they say it is not their job to police their platform, and keep listings from cities where all their listings are illegal.
It has taken years to kick Uber out of many countries, or force them to obey the law. Only now is Airbnb also under scrutiny. And in both cases only a
Re:Stuff vs Privacy (Score:5, Informative)
Is there a home insurance which covers Airbnb guests?
Yes. It is about three times the cost of normal homeowner's insurance. But it is mostly targeted toward dumb people, since Airbnb provides $1M in liability insurance during bookings.
It wouldn't surprise me if home insurance companies routinely search for properties they insure on Airbnb
They don't bother since they can just refuse to pay the claim, since the homeowner violated the terms.
Re: (Score:1)
It really doesn't matter what their reasons are, you just can't have cameras in a rental property or hotel room. People walk around nude, have sex, etc
Hotels most certainly have cameras all over the place - just not in private spaces. Bedrooms and bathrooms would be considered private spaces. This camera was in a main section of the building, not in a private space. So from a legal perspective they should be perfectly fine, even without disclosure (when was the last time you checked into a hotel and the desk clerk disclosed that you were already on camera, and the halls and other public spaces also had cameras?) The owner violated Airbnb policy that a
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Stuff vs Privacy (Score:5, Informative)
Not quite. Hotels may have cameras in the parts you're not renting (the public spaces), such as the lobby and dining room. If you're renting the whole house, then the whole house is the private space.
Re: (Score:2)
It really doesn't matter what their reasons are, you just can't have cameras in a rental property or hotel room. People walk around nude, have sex, etc...
Damn! On my couch? The sheets and blankets I put on the bed at least preserve the feasibility of sterile rental coitus.
Hmmm... (Score:2)
Rectal property, at a minimum, would seem to imply the sale of the Back Forty.
Re:Stuff vs Privacy (Score:5, Informative)
Stop renting out space that has your stuff in it.
Or learn to do a cost-benefit analysis. I have been an Airbnb host for 6 years and the worst that has happened is a few broken wine glasses and a stained towel. Since I had bought them at Walmart, total replacement cost was about $20.
A single bad review can cost me 100 times that in lost bookings.
Broken/stolen/damaged items are a non-problem.
everything should be documented and have proper insurance.
Insurance is to cover unaffordable expenses such as legal liability. Only an idiot would buy insurance for kitchen utensils or a TV from Costco.
Re: (Score:3)
Insurance is to cover unaffordable expenses such as legal liability. Only an idiot would buy insurance for kitchen utensils or a TV from Costco.
Yup. Generally, insurance is something you are required to pay to have at home and, doubly so, in business. Still, sometimes it costs X to have the insurance if you never use it, and X+Y if you ever file a claim.
For small(ish) claims that you can afford to just write a check to cover, don't call and initiate a claim. Save your insurance for catastrophic incidents you can't pay yourself out of.
Re: (Score:3)
When "hosts" leave a bunch of valuable stuff around for their "guests" it's little wonder they care more about protecting their crap than the privacy of the guests.
Stop renting out space that has your stuff in it.
Nothing of value should be in the property, everything should be documented and have proper insurance.
Or you could use AIrBnB the way they claim it is supposed to be used: To rent out an extra room or a couch. If you are also living there at the same time, you don't need a camera..
But of course 90% of AirBnB is just unlicenced hotels.
Re: (Score:2)
Well sure (Score:5, Interesting)
Homeowners probably read this article [slashdot.org] or any number of equally disturbing disaster rentals.
Googling "AirBnB renters trash house" gets similar results as typing in "Florida Man" and a random date.
Re: (Score:2)
However a camera does not protect you from that ...
Lottery effect (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There were broken windows and doors, damaged furniture, glass everywhere and large blood stains throughout the rental property,
Fair enough (Score:3)
Homeowners naturally would like to keep tabs on who does what in their home-for-let. Apparently, it's fine so long as they follow some rules. The homeowner did not, maybe didn't know the rules or misunderstood the requirement. So the handling was probably okay. A rules violation.
Further, I don't see that camera being "sneaky". That's a real CC camera, they are all over the place in buildings and public places. Doesn't look like anything except exactly what it is.
However we hear reports out of Korea where they have hidden cameras in lavatories looking like soap dispensers, and there is apparently a cottage industry of providers of hidden camera streams and up-skirt videos. That is obviously shady, no two ways about it. The current case, not so much.
Re: (Score:2)
Homeowners naturally would like to keep tabs on who does what in their home-for-let. Apparently, it's fine so long as they follow some rules. The homeowner did not, maybe didn't know the rules or misunderstood the requirement. So the handling was probably okay. A rules violation.
Further, I don't see that camera being "sneaky". That's a real CC camera, they are all over the place in buildings and public places. Doesn't look like anything except exactly what it is.
However we hear reports out of Korea where they have hidden cameras in lavatories looking like soap dispensers, and there is apparently a cottage industry of providers of hidden camera streams and up-skirt videos. That is obviously shady, no two ways about it. The current case, not so much.
That was my thought as well. Apparently Airbnb owners are allowed to put in surveillance cameras providing they make full disclosure to the guests. That seems to be their fault here.
Re: (Score:3)
At LEAST read TF Summary:
the family tracked down the camera, concealed in what appeared to be a smoke alarm or carbon monoxide detector
Why do Airbnb rentals get a free pass? (Score:3)
I have security cameras around the outside for the tenants' protection since we've had a few robber
I wouldn't have moved to a hotel... (Score:2)
Step 1: Disconnect router "accidentally" while plugging phone in.
Step 2: Superglue on the camera's lense.
Not like the owners can really bitch about damage, since the camera is either against AirBnB's ToS or outright illegal. Possibly both.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not like the owners can really bitch about damage, since the camera is either against AirBnB's ToS or outright illegal. Possibly both. ...
One thing has nothing to do with the other. Obviously he can sue you for damage
Re: (Score:3)
Probably worth the "risk" (Score:2)
It's probably worth the risk for a homeowner to conceal a camera in the main area of a home to have at least some evidence in case something happens to the property. After all, the risk is "Airbbnb no longer lets you rent your property through them" which is probably an acceptable liability for having some evidence for use in legal proceedings. The "legality" of having a camera in a private residence, in a "public" space like a living room or kitchen is probably pretty sound. This is purely an Airbnb req
Re: (Score:2)
The "legality" of having a camera in a private residence, in a "public" space like a living room or kitchen is probably pretty sound. ... no? ... the moment you rent it, it belongs to the renter. Regardless if you do it via AirBNB or privately or craiglist etc.
Erm
You rent something
Re: Probably worth the "risk" (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Or you can wait 2 weeks and buy the $8 knock-off on eBay. That's a great idea and the implementation looks good, but $198 for a few ICs, 6 IR LEDs, and $2 worth of injection molding is insane. I can see $59 even, but $200?
$200 is steep .. but I'm sure the "think o fetch children crowd" will think its reasonable
Why hdie it (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The creepy part is that the camera is hidden.
How is it creepy? It was in the common room, and quite obviously there for non-nefarious purposes.
I'd have just stuck some tape over it, checked there were no other cameras, and got on with enjoying my vacation.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
'Common room'? Unless the room was public how can you know people wouldn't be walking around naked in it?
What's with the nudity phobia? Are you assuming the camera was for sexual voyeurism?
I read that if there was a chemical weapons attack in the US, thousands of people would rather die than remove their contaminated clothing in public.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Besides, if it's not a problem, why hide it??
Are you talking about the camera, or the human body?
Re: (Score:2)
"High Standard" (Score:2)
Actually AirBnB's investigation followed the exact standard they set for themselves. AirBnB's own policy says that it will only ban a host if a hidden camera is in the bedroom, bathroom, or single room rental.
If AirBnB wants to sound apologetic then can change their standard rather than spin bullshit.
Don't you always (Score:2)
Not a credible enforcer of its own policies (Score:2)
So yet another story confirms that a VC capital funded IT startup has no credibility. Buyer beware. Use at your own risk. Don't expect any kind of ethical behaviour from them.
I wonder what they're like as employers?
Caveat Emptor (Score:1)
I don't travel much and when I do I stay in hotels. I've had two airBnBs so far, and both of them were pretty extreme cases of let the Buyer beware.
#1 - billed as private room & bath in the host's house. Host mentioned "two beautiful, clean cats" but no other occupants. Day 1, host says her friend was staying in the room i was supposed to get and "would I mind" staying in this other room (so two separate rental rooms in the same house) the first night while she cleaned up. Already a little suspicio