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.
What a genius idea, just walk up to a fish eye lens security camera on someone’s house, one that you know is recording, and do a bit of criminal damage.
I hate that I have to clarify that I’m not defending these companies that people brainlessly support in the name of convenience. I’m saying that unless your appearance is completely obfuscated, then spraypainting people’s personal property is a dumb idea.
Use lasers. It’s far more expensive to replace and entirely burnt out sensor than it is to clean off spraypaint. (For legal reasons this is a joke)