In a recent Guardian article about the Guthrie kidnapping (and probable murder) they indicated at the end of the article that efforts to identify the kidnappers had been stymied because her Ring camera subscription wasn’t active:

They had said that one roadblock in the ensuing search for Guthrie was the fact that somebody had disconnected her doorbell camera when she disappeared. And because she was not actively subscribed to the doorbell camera service provider, they could not immediately get images, they said.

Only for Patal (as of course he would seeing he has no comprehension of opsec) to expose the fact that the FBI able to obtain recordings from Ring cameras, even when the owner is unsubscribed to the cloud storage service they provide:

The FBI director, Kash Patel, published the images as the search for Nancy Guthrie, 84, stretched into its second week, saying the images had been “previously inaccessible” but were subsequently obtained from “residual data located in back-end systems”.

Pretty horrifying for those who don’t want their cameras reporting back. And yes yes i get that Ring has some pretty severe security breaches and problems and you shouldn’t be using them but the idea that video is being stored for over a week in Ring’s non-volatile storage systems, even when you’re not paying for it, is pretty damn bad,

Apologies if this fact, breach of privacy, was already known and in the public domain. This is something i’ve just learnt about.

  • w3dd1e@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    15 hours ago

    I have a doorbell camera with local storage. I specifically got one that doesn’t transmit my data to their servers.

    Everything I do from now on will be self hosted. Fuck Big Brother.

    • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      14 hours ago

      Can you share the model? People were asking me about this recently and said that there are no good alternatives to ring. Thats obviously bs but i didnt wanna spend a bunch of time searching to prove em wrong.

    • ExtremeDullard@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      14 hours ago

      I have a security camera at my house. Not for security, but to watch the nature at the back from inside the house.

      I specifically did NOT install a SD card in it nor an NVR, so if it’s ever removed as evidence for any kind of reason, it will have no story to tell. And of course, it’s on our LAN and firewalled off the internet.

      • w3dd1e@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I got mine for my dogs. I wanted to be able to check on them when they were outside while I was working.

        It does not has unless it detects dogs or people on my yard. It had a feature to block out the street or my neighbors property, and I did that.