this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
333 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

59681 readers
3639 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Here is an article where you can read more: https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/mozilla-publishes-ring-doorbell-vulnerability-following-amazons-apathy/

Quoted a portion:

(SAN FRANCISCO, CA | TUESDAY, JUNE 6, 2023) -- Today, Mozilla is publicizing a security vulnerability in Amazon’s Ring Wireless Video Doorbell. Mozilla shared the vulnerability with Amazon over 90 days ago, but Amazon has yet to address the issue. Now, per industry standards, Mozilla is sharing its findings publicly to alert Ring Doorbell users and to further pressure Amazon to take action.

Following a penetration test of the Ring Doorbell conducted in October-November 2022, Mozilla and collaborator Cure53 determined that the device is vulnerable to Wi-Fi deauthentication attacks. Bad actors can leverage these weaknesses to disconnect the device from the internet using easily-accessible tools.

As a result, those bad actors could take the doorbell offline and then have their activities go unrecorded — undermining the product’s core purpose. Even after the doorbell is reconnected to the internet, a user will receive no alert about the attack.

Mozilla’s disclosure comes just days after Ring’s $5.8 million settlement with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) over other serious privacy and security issues. The FTC found that “Ring’s poor privacy and lax security let employees spy on customers through their cameras, including those in their bedrooms or bathrooms, and made customers' videos, including videos of kids, vulnerable to online attackers.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

it really sucks to have to walk past these cameras... no consent needed apparently but the privacy implications are huge

[–] ShunkW 29 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're generally in a public place. At least in the US, you have no expectation of privacy in public. Anyone can record you without your consent

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

While that might be true, I think some of these expectations and understandings are based on a world that no longer exists.

In the past, you could only be seen by the few people around you. Even when recorded, there was a limited number of people that could see the video. Now some influencer can run up to you and share your reaction with a few hundred million people. On the side of data collection, companies have so much more aggregate data that they can use and abuse. With newer algorithms to analyze that data, they can keep pumping more and more data into it to figure out intimate details about who you are and how you feel about things.

So yea that might be how our laws and social norms are set up now, but we don't have to stick to it if it doesn't make sense anymore.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

How long in the past are you talking? Ring cameras are basically just cheap CCTV cameras which have been around for an incredibly long time. You’re complaining you can’t walk in front of people’s houses without being recorded I guess, but how long have you been complaining about not being able to walk past your gas station or Walmart?

It’s a larger scale, but honestly private property deserves the protection more.

Amazon sucks though, ubiquiti is where it’s at.

ETA: I know you’re not the person who originally posted this complaint, but since you’re defending their point then I assume you also agree with it.