Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy Security Crime

Amazon's Ring Doorbell Update Allows Opt Out of All Police Video Requests (mashable.com) 74

Posted by BeauHD from the long-overdue-updates dept.
Amazon's Ring doorbell has rolled out a new update that lets users add and remove shared users on an account, restrict third-party access, view two-factor authentication settings, and (perhaps, most importantly) opt out of all video request notifications from law enforcement. Mashable reports: Uncovered in reporting by Motherboard and Gizmodo in 2019, the scale of Amazon's Neighbor Portal program is much larger than originally believed -- and its various affiliations with law enforcement has raised alarming ethical questions. In the new update, users will be able to see an "Active Law Enforcement Map" clarifying which local institutions are part of the Neighbor Portal network. They will also be able to disable requests for video from officials, whether or not they have received one in the past. (This feature was available previously, but an account had to have received one request for the opt-out option to appear.)

That said, Ring is suggesting users allow video request notifications -- citing specific instances where such evidence helped solve criminal cases. According to Ring's official press release, the control center update will be made available to all Android and iOS users within "the next few days." Per the same release, this is the first of numerous security and privacy updates planned for the system.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Amazon's Ring Doorbell Update Allows Opt Out of All Police Video Requests More

Amazon's Ring Doorbell Update Allows Opt Out of All Police Video Requests

Comments Filter:
  • Funny thing about this, if they need something they can still get it, and if the poor retard who trusted a Ring spy device to be installed on their door Amazon can go "whoops, software glitch caused your opt-out to be reset" - but more likely it will never even get that far because the only people to find out their opt-out was ignored will be criminals who have their lives wrecked and have bigger defense issues to deal with than a hopeless fight against a trillion dollar company.

    • Re:Software Glitches (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Known Nutter ( 988758 ) on Tuesday February 04, 2020 @06:40PM (#59691414)

      the only people to find out their opt-out was ignored will be criminals who have their lives wrecked...

      What kind of criminal would install a Ring doorbell spy device on their place of residence? I mean, nice rant and all, but come on, let's be a little bit realistic here, shall we?

      • There is no way, within the bounds of human time, for an American citizen to understand all the laws under which they are bound.

      • Re:Software Glitches (Score:4, Insightful)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Wednesday February 05, 2020 @08:38AM (#59692738) Homepage Journal

        The kind of criminal worried about other criminals coming to their door, possibly looking for that ten grand they owe.

        Anyway many criminals don't plan to become criminals. Crimes of opportunity, in other words. So they might already have the doorbell installed. It's probably already happened, Amazon just keeps quiet about it because it would be bad press for them.

    • Re:Software Glitches (Score:5, Insightful)

      by cayenne8 ( 626475 ) on Tuesday February 04, 2020 @06:48PM (#59691444) Homepage Journal
      I have a better idea. Make the cop info sharing option. OPT IN....

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by rtb61 ( 674572 )

        How about a dose of reality. Can what ever the fuck you promise, be taken right out at any time in an update. I would not trust Amazon, they will patch out any promise they make as soon as they are paid to do so.

        Make fucking promise you fucking lying scummy cunt tech corporations, they fucking hard wire it, else shit the fuck up, you all have proven consumer level trust is a marketing lie. Read the warranty, the illegal post purchase licence agreements. Those fuckers lie with every breath.

        Want to make pro

      • Ring has all your doorbell videos in the AWS cloud. Opt-Out or Opt-In doesn't matter at all when police and prosecutors can subpoena AWS directly to get your videos.

        You've also agreed to non-police uses of your videos, like making them all available to Ring R&D in the Ukraine [theintercept.com] so that they can be used for facial recognition [theintercept.com]. Not that anyone will hear about that though [theintercept.com].

      • You have quaint ideas , sir , 'op-in' ? ... next thing you know you'll suggest that it should state so on the package when buying that it actually does what it does ? i'm just wondering, who the hell would put up something like that on their front porch ? And what's the longterm deal here, i heard they were trying to get people to let delivery service inside while they werent home (and also : who the hell would actually consider doing that ...) What troubles me more is that lately when i go on site like t

    • You don't even need that, it looks like it's opt-out by default, not opt-in. The vast majority of users never change their defaults (this phenomenon is so widespread that it's treated as a form of de facto regulation), which means it's just a fig-leaf for Amazon, they get to say "look, we fixed this" while in practice nothing has changed.

      One the one hand it's better than the Facebook approach, Zuckerberg repeatedly admits he's an alcoholic and promises to change but keeps right on drinking, while Amazon m

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by AHuxley ( 892839 )
      Is it cheaper just to set a flag on a video to not show to that user than code for tested per video removal?
  • I guess enough people are pissed off about Ring

  • 1984 is not a manual people!!! Darn Ring is always spying on us. I canâ(TM)t believe people actually pay to be spied upon!!!!

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Why can't you believe it? Your country voted for its current president, anything is possible.

      • If a corporate oligarchy picks two monsters as candidates, that were equal in pretty much everything that mattered, and you "get to" pick one of them, you weren't the one doing the voting.

        And they were different only in how they implemented their shafting you to distinguish themselves from the others.

        Would you acually have had a choice, then you'd have been able to pick Sanders. Or *yourself*, for that matter!

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by shilly ( 142940 )

          Oooh look, an American Corbynista. And just as persistent in the teeth of actual facts and electoral results as our lot, too. If you were over here, you'd be bleating on about Bliar and Red Tories and all that shit, studiously ignoring the facts that (1) the only time life for poor people in the UK has got better as a result of government policy in the last 50 years was during the Blair / Brown era, particularly the former, and (2) the UK has "fuck off, no fucking way" every single time it's had the opportu

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by AHuxley ( 892839 )
      1984 would be the NSA and GCHQ staff using a gov issued in home webcam 24/7...
      ie the gov would have to demand a webcam is installed in a home...
      For some city worker to talk to the user...
      For the city worker to suggest sport, food...
      This a product a person had to buy for their own use.
      Had to connect, set up and want to use.
      On their land, looking out on their land.
      To catch criminals doing crime .. like stealing a package...trying to enter a home..
      Something the owner of the camera had to pay for and

  • So I can see the "Active Law Enforcement Map". Ring users who have opted into sharing with local LE. Can I see a map of those users who have opted out?

  • How about (Score:5, Insightful)

    by markdavis ( 642305 ) on Tuesday February 04, 2020 @06:54PM (#59691466)

    How about:

    * Auto delete video [like really delete] after X hours unless the customer requests to save a portion?
    * Store no video at all unless there is an event detected?
    * Store no video at all in Amazon cloud, just send event video to the customer's device where it is stored?
    * Store video encrypted by the user so NOBODY can view it, including Amazon, without permission?

    I am guessing no to all the above...

    • So they could still grab that key if they wanted to. If you don't trust Amazon, you can't use their software, nor their hardware.

    • Re:How about (Score:5, Insightful)

      by HalAtWork ( 926717 ) on Tuesday February 04, 2020 @07:31PM (#59691586)

      Encrypt locally on the device with a user key on the way out to the cloud, if a police request is made the user can acknowledge yes/no with the time code requested so the user can preview the video, and only send if the user says yes. Only the user with the key can view/unlock video.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        This will just result in angry visits from the police demanding to know why you didn't hand over the video.

        That's why it's supposed to need a judge to oversee these requests, someone supposedly impartial who the cops can't easily lean on or retaliate against.

        • If they had a warrant and it is an above board request then there is no problem. But they don't have an inherent right to the data and aren't entitled to it by default.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Most people want the video recorded for 30 days so that if they discover a scratch on their car or something is missing they can go back through the historic video looking for who did it.

      Ideally the Ring doorbell wouldn't store video at all, just stream it to the phone when required. For storing video a separate camera would be required, and it would legally have to be positioned such that it only capture's the owner's property, not the street or other houses.

      That's basically how it is in the UK, you can ca

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Tom ( 822 )

      Not sure if the device has enough power to encrypt a live-feed in realtime, which is one of the cloud features it offers. That's also why it sends into the cloud - so I can check who's at the door even when I'm in the office.

    • OR....get a foscam or some other web connected camera where you still control YOUR data.

  • The flags those who do for closer scrutiny.

    • You are the literal walking chilling effect.

      Don't enable the enemy, please.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by MrKaos ( 858439 )

        You are the literal walking chilling effect.

        I'm the canary in the cage. With the amount of proposed legislation I read about how our freedoms are whittled away by politicians I want to scream warnings from roof tops but it's not my style. Sarcasm seems to be an appropriate tool.

        Don't enable the enemy, please.

        I'm sure they're scanning my posts for every idea. In the meantime if people would stop giving up their freedoms for the perception of feeling more secure I think all of us would be better off. Just don't buy privacy infringing products in the first place because if anyo

  • Best way to opt out (Score:5, Insightful)

    by marcle ( 1575627 ) on Tuesday February 04, 2020 @07:05PM (#59691502)

    Don't buy a Ring.

    • Try telling that to my girlfriend.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      But what if your neighbour gets one and has it pointed at your house? Your movements, you visitors, to some extend what you do in the privacy of your own home is all recorded and can be shared with the cops without your consent.

  • This is a dick move. Because they know precisely that most people won't know or know enough to care.

    This should be illegal, plain and simple. "Real prison time for Bezos" illegal. And any government not making it illegal, is complicit in the crimes.

  • That said, Ring is suggesting users allow video request notifications -- citing specific instances where such evidence helped solve criminal cases.

    Not to go all bill of rights on you, but perhaps you could curtail unilateral access to the surveillance, except in instances when a court allows the subpoena or the homeowner grants access. Why does law enforcement need unfettered access, you know, if they're not (doing anything wrong) abusing the privilege?

    • I prefer to selectively decide which laws I want the police to enforce. I will gladly give them anything that looks like theft, vandalism, or suspicious activities with children. But if I catch someone smoking a joint, I'm just going to pretend it didn't happen.

  • What stops the government from getting a judge to order Amazon to hand over real-time access to Ring videos similar to the Prism program?

    Amazon addressed this issue because of the bad PR, but the bottom line is they can not be trusted. Their priorities are not your priorities.

  • I am not a lawyer, but... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Pollux ( 102520 ) <speter@[ ]ata.net.eg ['ted' in gap]> on Tuesday February 04, 2020 @08:18PM (#59691692) Journal

    "Opting out of police requests" doesn't quite mean what I think people think it means. If Amazon has video the police want, the police can always subpoena for any evidence that exists within Amazon's possession. All this does is tell Amazon that you don't want the police to view your video without a subpoena.

    But even then, the agreement -really- means nothing, because Amazon can always change their minds at a moment's notice and give police free reign yet again. Why? Because, according to the fine print of the Ring terms of service [ring.com], they can. ("You hereby grant Ring and its licensees an unlimited, irrevocable, fee free and royalty-free, perpetual, worldwide right to use, distribute, store, delete, translate, copy, modify, display, and create derivative works from such Content that you share through our Services.")

    Don't want Big Blue using your cameras to spy on your community? Don't buy Ring.

    • Amazon's model will be to rent access to the material. They have a irrevocable license to do this, so subpoenas not required. The Ring owner's ongoing permission is irrelevant, and simply a massive red herring about who actually controls access to the material.

      You hereby grant Ring and its licensees an unlimited, irrevocable, fee free and royalty-free, perpetual, worldwide right to use...

  • The problem is crime down a street.
    The solution is to show police the criminals taking a package, trying to enter a home...
    The police cant say no crime was reported.
    The world can see the crime, who is doing the crime and that criminals are free to do crime in that city.
    Why is a city so accepting a level of crime?
    What are the police doing with decades of city spending on police work?
    Privacy for criminals? Is it "human rights" to steal any number of packages from streets for years .. a decade?

    What ab

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by MrKaos ( 858439 )

      I can't help reading your post to a rap beat.

      I'm more concerned about police presenting a warrant to access the footage the camera takes. But since it's all going up to the cloud who would even know its been accessed.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AHuxley ( 892839 )
        Re "I'm more concerned about police presenting a warrant to access the footage the camera takes.".. think back to how
        Domain Awareness System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] once worked...
        ie what a police "partnership" can do in near real time... after a crime.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by MrKaos ( 858439 )
          I'm more concerned what they do a few years later and they are piecing together cases of people that just happen to go past a camera of interest. Do you remember Total Information Awareness? so many names for "Benign Information Gathering".

  • So if many of your neighbors have it on your street and adjacent streets who don't file a waiver, you are still under full surveillance.

  • So, sure I could opt out but heck I don't even need to have a Ring .. my neighbor across the street could have one and I don't get to opt out of them sharing pictures of my house with law enforcement. ... yeah, I don't get any say in that unless I can convince my neighbor not to share.

  • The whole attraction of having a cheap camera set up on your front door is understandable, easy and cheap security feature to add. However such thing has been around a lot longer before the trillion dollar tech company figured out how to use it to exploit consumers. With a bit more trouble you can set up a "eye hole camera" set up to a raspberry pi as an easy door security camera without using the local police department as your video backup drive.
    You can probably even find solutions where you dont need to

  • Notice how all the features that the general public does not want always requires people to opt-out and never in?

Slashdot Top Deals

Don't tell me how hard you work. Tell me how much you get done. -- James J. Ling

Close