> Apple’s default setting for their doorbells is end-to-end encryption which means the company is unable to share user video at all
Why won’t Google Nest and Amazon Ring do this?
I have 6 Nest cameras throughout my home ( not the doorbell product)
Why won’t Google Nest and Amazon Ring do this?
I have 6 Nest cameras throughout my home ( not the doorbell product)
Also, they can charge police for these data.
I won’t buy their products because of their decision to monetize over privacy. What I find interesting is that their products aren’t cheaper than other privacy preserving products from Wyze and Apple so this extra revenue is pure profit or gravy. This isn’t some essential need of their business model, they just don’t respect user privacy enough to avoid this extra revenue.
UX might be a bigger issue, as it is harder to view this data in any device and still keep keys unaccessible by Google. But still not too hard. People use Whatsapp web in daily basis.
Main problem is the ML use for video feed to trigger some stuff etc.
> In response to a request for information if we believe disclosure is in accordance with, or required by, any applicable law or legal process, including lawful requests by public authorities to meet national security or law enforcement requirements;
IANAL but that sure sounds to me like they will provide data in cases where they aren't legally required to (as in a warrant) as long as they believe it's "in accordance with" the law. Which could mean almost anything other than a clearly illegal request.
https://www.wyze.com/policies/privacy-policy#c
I like Wyze and think they are acting in good faith, but I wouldn't assume they would say no to a request from government/police. They may offer local recording and RTSP, but AFAIK they are still cloud connected unless you otherwise block them or use alternate firmware and hence not private.
https://support.ring.com/hc/en-gb/articles/360054941511-Unde...
Many of these features are key selling points, so most consumers aren't going to be interested in turning end-to-end encryption on.
It also doesn't work on battery-powered devices, presumably because they offload as much work as possible to the server to save power.
Unfortunately, either Ring or Nest is required in my neighborhood given our property crime issues.
What do you do with that footage? I have a full resolution video of a dude stealing $300 worth of crabbing equipment from my porch. What’s next? Police is not going to do anything about it even though there’s probably technically a way to track him down.
Ring says it offers end-to-end encryption [1].
[1] https://blog.ring.com/products-innovation/ring-announces-end...
It's a sensible design choice given the current constraints of the hardware.
It’s one of those perverse things that they are some of the few companies that actually don’t sell user data, and yet they’re the ones that are most frequently accused of it.
I don’t think it helps us in keeping big tech companies to account when we spread false information about them.
You said it yourself... How would you analyze the data if it's encrypted?
https://support.apple.com/en-gb/guide/icloud/mme054c72692/1....
https://support.apple.com/guide/icloud/set-up-homekit-secure...
Yet it is still end to end encrypted because the processing happens locally on device (on the hub) instead of on a cloud server.
I have the ability to detect people, animals, vehicles, and packages and set recording settings based on that. In addition to if I am home or not based on the existing detection round that built into HomeKit.
This narrative around Apple's products missing major features is no longer true and has not been for a while.
But it seems to work decent enough. However the face recognition works off of the faces you have categorized in photos. So actually recognizing specific people will only be as good as that database is. I assume in the backend it is largely the same tech so you can get an idea of how well it will work based on that.
I can't compare it to other offerings since I have never used them, but it does what I need it to do.
I have had issues with false positives, but I also am using a not great quality camera with it so it is limited with that. I plan on getting a better camera but just have not had a need for it yet.
Also, can Android users use it?
Technically yeah you need to leave the Apple TV running (or a HomePod) but it just stays in standby mode anyways. But I don't know 100% how that works power wise.
When I look in my Home app at the hubs, I see all of my HomePods and Apple TV's there. The living room Apple TV is marked as "Connected" and the others "Standby". Assuming that means the Apple TV is the one processing things, it does not appear that the Apple TV is doing a ton. The light isn't on and it isn't generating really any heat.
To my knowledge Android can't use HomeKit but maybe there are third party ways to use HomeKit with an Apple hub. But I would be surprised if those third party ways could access the secure video. But I honestly don't know.
I don't see how that's possible. See the instructions at:
https://support.apple.com/guide/icloud/set-up-homekit-secure...
Nothing in the process requires a token/authentication/blessing be done from a pre-existing hub machine that would have to control the encryption. Apple can remotely grant your device HomeKit cloud video based on nothing more than your ability to attest ownership of your new device.
And if they can do that, they can certainly recover the video internally for anyone who wants it. They just choose not to, and you believe them (where you clearly don't for Amazon).