this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2026
126 points (92.0% liked)

Privacy

9443 readers
278 users here now

A community for Lemmy users interested in privacy

Rules:

  1. Be civil
  2. No spam posting
  3. Keep posts on-topic
  4. No trolling

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Tilgare@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

This is why I bought Ubiquiti. Self hosting is the ONLY way I was ever buying into a camera syatem.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 33 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

The challenge is… how do you convince all your neighbors to take down their Ring doorbells?

[–] Lenggo@lemmy.world 6 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Aside from the obvious concerns, from a cost perspective why would you chose ring when you have to pay for it to be useful. There are other options that are cheaper and free to use as long as you pop an SD card in them. Obviously they aren't totally innocent of concern but feels like people do zero research into what's available.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 10 points 7 hours ago

My experience is that people are conditioned these days to do everything by subscription, even when it provides no additional value.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 8 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

A mix of blackmail and extortion

Just kidding, in reality there is no ethical way to control what your neibours do. What you can do is inform them about the recent controversies regarding Ring cameras.

[–] greenskye@lemmy.zip 10 points 6 hours ago

It'd be nice if my HOA banned Ring cameras instead of solar

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 hours ago

I’m imagining a series of signs I could walk in front of the cameras….

[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

A cleverer angle'd be to find out how to get them to switch to an open-source cctv alternative instead, I feel. πŸ€“

Community action. ✊🏼

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 3 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

A CCTV setup likely won’t work for people who just want a video doorbell.

But replacing a Ring with something like a Reolink means they can start with the same service, and over time move to RTSP and a local server as they become more aware of privacy implications and are driven to invest in a contained system.

Likely people will never go CC though, as the entire point for most people is to see what shows up at their door when they’re not at home.

I use reolink at my office.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

There are ways to see what's at your door when you aren't home that don't rely on third parties having access to the footage at least

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 hours ago

Frigate NVR and Netbird VPN. I don't use it like this, but it would work excellently.

[–] mos@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Is Reolink something you can see the live video remotely? I could see a motion detection system at your doorstep that lets you know someone is there but you'd have to be able to login somehow to get a view.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 2 points 8 hours ago

Reolink doorbells allow you to configure them how you want; you can use a cloud-hosted feed, cloud-hosted notification only, self-hosted feed, self-hosted notification only, and write-to-microSD only. They can use WiFi or wired Ethernet.

I have mine set to do cloud push for notifications, RTSP to my internal home server only; so I log in via VPN if I want to see the video.

[–] brewery@feddit.uk 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Does this apply to arlo cameras too?

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 hours ago

It applies to any cloud-based camera system. I don't know if those are or not.

[–] ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 15 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Convert your wyze cams to local with Thingino and use rtsp cameras then block their ability to access outside web.

[–] CaptainHowdy@lemmy.zip 1 points 5 hours ago

That's not actually the whole problem. If you watch the video, he brings up how your insurance company or the police can demand your footage (like all of it) and if you don't comply you could have your claim denied, or face charges.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not watching some guy slooowwwwwwwwwwly report on some issue.

Is there a version where a writer wrote words? Even if it's not a writer - or a proficient one - I'd still take words.

[–] bandwidthcrisis@lemmy.world -2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I hate to say it. But this is one case where I find AI useful, it can summarize the video:

Privacy Risks: These devices feed personal data to corporations, insurance companies, and law enforcement

Technical Vulnerabilities: Jordan demonstrates how these cameras can be hacked via deauth attacks to disrupt connections. RF side-channel attacks to monitor activity, and data metadata analysis.

Ineffectiveness: The video notes that research shows little evidence that these cameras actually deter crime.

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Fun fact, LLMs just pull the transcript and summarize it.

Personally, if I really want to know what a video is about, I'll watch it at like quadruple speed. YouTube's player even has a native speed control now (though it only goes up to like double speed).

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 hours ago

I just wait for someone to summarize it in Lemmy comments.