Ring cancels its partnership with Flock Safety after surveillance backlash
237 points
by c420
3 hours ago
| 16 comments
| theverge.com
| HN
dabinat
1 hour ago
[-]
> Following a comprehensive review, we determined the planned Flock Safety integration would require significantly more time and resources than anticipated.

That doesn’t sound like “we’re cancelling this because our customers let us know loud and clear that they were ethically against this”. If the only thing keeping them from doing this is time and money, what guarantee do we have that they won’t do it again if time and money allow?

reply
idle_zealot
1 hour ago
[-]
You seem to be taking the company's words at face value and assuming good faith. I would caution against doing that.
reply
riversflow
1 minute ago
[-]
Amazing how often people do that. Corporations have very little incentive to be truthful and often have good reason to be dishonest. I notice it particularly wrt video games, gamers are always taking studio’s messaging as gospel and not corporate comms.
reply
chmod775
53 minutes ago
[-]
They're saying that because saying what they actually mean would paint flock in a negative light, which they likely want to avoid for various reasons.
reply
stalfosknight
20 minutes ago
[-]
So they'd rather lie in their press release.
reply
dakolli
39 minutes ago
[-]
Doesn't matter, I've come to the conclusion I'll never buy into one these networks. There's a reason "security" cameras were always on "closed circuit", there's no need give these companies money.
reply
noduerme
6 minutes ago
[-]
I've had a couple Ring cams for years. I hate the network, hate having to pay for the cloud storage, I've just been too lazy to research self-hosted alternatives. Is there solution you'd recommend that's relatively polished and easy to use?
reply
Cerium
1 minute ago
[-]
It is not really cheap, nor best "value for the dollar", but I am extremely satisfied with UniFi [0]. Nearly instant setup, decent mobile apps, web interface, basically just works as you need.

[0] https://unifi.ui.com/

reply
add-sub-mul-div
34 minutes ago
[-]
Same. The first thing I did when I bought my house was remove the Ring doorbell.
reply
s0a
1 hour ago
[-]
Frigate NVR + Amcrest cameras. 100% local, private, on-device AI object recognition and classification. Can use a Google Coral USB TPU to speed that up. Runs on hardware as modest as a Raspberry Pi.
reply
idle_zealot
1 hour ago
[-]
Great. Now package that as a plug-and-play product so more than 1000 nerds will use it instead of participating in the largest dragnet in history ;)
reply
geerlingguy
6 minutes ago
[-]
This is only half the problem.

The other half, at least for Ring doorbells, is making it easy to get push notifications when button pressed, with instant two-way connection for chatting through the camera.

It's already hard enough as a "certified homelabber" to get these things set up and running.

reply
mandeepj
2 hours ago
[-]
“Canceled” for now. Maybe it was just a video, they’ll continue with the “quiet” development and slowly launch it
reply
alehlopeh
1 hour ago
[-]
A lot of you won’t want to hear it but HomeKit + iCloud secure video is the only way to go. For one thing it’s end to end encrypted. You can also do ML stuff like face recognition which happens locally on your Apple TV. And you can set it to trigger HomeKit scenes if eg the person in the video isn’t recognized, or if it recognizes a particular person. Yeah Apple bad, blah blah. But they don’t have an incentive to sell your data.
reply
whatever1
1 hour ago
[-]
Unless you explicitly enable Advanced Protection mode for all your devices, Apple stores your key in their servers and will give it to whoever legitimate looking asks for it. Aka ICE etc will definitely be granted access.
reply
nozzlegear
24 minutes ago
[-]
> Unless you explicitly enable Advanced Protection mode for all your devices

This is very easy though, you just go to your iCloud account settings under the settings app and enable it. It should be on by default imo, but I understand the argument for why it isn't.

Either way, enabling it is not a barrier and ICE cannot be granted access once you do unless you yourself give them that access.

reply
zamadatix
1 hour ago
[-]
When I got an Apple TV I never expected the main value I'd get out of it was being a smart home hub. I do wish the automations were a bit more programmable. Other than that it has been perfect, everything even failed over to my other Apple TV when rearranging the living room without having to think about setting either up as hubs.
reply
dewey
58 minutes ago
[-]
Also it's the perfect Tailscale exit node that's always online in your home (They have a tvOS app)
reply
noduerme
1 minute ago
[-]
I bought a windows minipc a couple months ago for this purpose, and it's basically useless if I'm on the road more than a week, because every windows update causes a reboot and a logout. I know, I should run Linux on it.
reply
Marsymars
1 hour ago
[-]
I'm a heavy Apple user (Apple TVs, Mac Mini, iPad), but we also have Android phones in my household, so HomeKit Secure Video is a no-go.

If Apple ever releases an Apple Home app for Android, I'd transition my entire home over by the time of my next Google Home Premium subscription renewal.

reply
jonahx
1 hour ago
[-]
I would like to replace Ring with something fully local.

Local ML/face recognition would be a bonus. Ability to sync to a private owned server owned by me would be a bonus.

I'm assuming there are projects out there that would enable this -- does anyone have recommendations?

reply
brewtide
1 hour ago
[-]
Frigate NVR tied to a home assistant instance has my phone getting proactive notifications about people, birds, and buses (in their select areas...). It's not the easiest thing to setup, but if you're using ethernet cameras it seems to work very very well. The few POS wyze cameras's I have on the system tend to cause some problems, but I know for a fact it's 100% a combination of a) wifi (no matter how 'quality') b) wyze.

So, yeah. Look into frigate.

reply
radredgreen2
55 minutes ago
[-]
And you can run open source camera firmware on a disconnected vlan if you don't want to trust a phone app or a camera with internet access.

https://github.com/radredgreen/wyrecam

reply
willio58
1 hour ago
[-]
And there’s no subscription right?
reply
righthand
1 hour ago
[-]
Icloud subscription.
reply
righthand
1 hour ago
[-]
Apple totally sells your data, they just anonymize it first. Why do you think they shifted towards services?

They also can give the Feds access to your iCloud data through a NSL. Just like Prism.

reply
nozzlegear
11 minutes ago
[-]
McDonald's can give my data to the feds through an NSL, yet I still buy their fries every now and then despite the risk.
reply
macki0
1 hour ago
[-]
iCloud data can be end to end encrypted (https://support.apple.com/en-gb/108756)
reply
mwambua
1 hour ago
[-]
Do you have evidence of that?
reply
donohoe
1 hour ago
[-]
Citation needed
reply
p-e-w
1 hour ago
[-]
There’s actually another alternative: Just don’t install surveillance in your home. Approximately nobody had it 20 years ago. Before asking which unreliable, overpriced, invasive gadget to buy, think about whether you really need any of them.
reply
nozzlegear
18 minutes ago
[-]
Why? I like to keep an eye on my dogs when we're away, and it's all done securely using HomeKit video. My iCloud is e2e encrypted and the camera doesn't upload anywhere besides there.

What's the invasive part? Not giving my dogs privacy when we're out of the home?

reply
zamadatix
18 minutes ago
[-]
Approximately nobody was using everything x years ago. That's not really a measure of what's nice to have and what's not, it's a measure of how long the nice to have has been around.
reply
ThatMedicIsASpy
50 minutes ago
[-]
A 1080p cam with night vision a mic and speakers is 20 bucks. Baby monitors where more expensive in the past (audio only).
reply
kulahan
58 minutes ago
[-]
Tons of people had cameras 20 years ago. It was 2006, not 1906. Besides, we've had pets for surveillance for hundreds of thousands of years. Literally nobody in history has thought "nah no need for security".

What a ridiculous way to try and be on a high horse.

reply
Barrin92
1 hour ago
[-]
I always wonder what the overlap of this economically is. If you can afford all this home surveillance gear aren't you already likely to live in a place that's comically safe? Why are in particular Americans with their gated communities full of soccer moms and Labradors putting cameras on their house as if they're living on a US military base?
reply
recursive
3 minutes ago
[-]
I like the idea of comedy based on safety.
reply
nozzlegear
13 minutes ago
[-]
We have cameras to watch our dogs and make sure they're not getting into trouble with each other, things in the house, the cats, etc. We're not worried about bad guys or our personal safety.
reply
minimaxir
3 hours ago
[-]
Which Super Bowl LX ads haven't backfired yet?
reply
ramuel
3 hours ago
[-]
The Anthropic one? Although I'm sure they'll put ads into claude eventually
reply
rwc
2 hours ago
[-]
Early audience response suggested the message struggled to land. According to an iSpot survey of 500 viewers, the ad’s likeability score placed it in the bottom 3% compared with Super Bowl ads over the past five years. Its top-two-box purchase intent scored 24% below Super Bowl norms and 19% below ads in its category that aired over the last 90 days. Viewers most commonly described their reaction as “WTF,” signaling confusion around both the message and the execution.

https://www.adweek.com/brand-marketing/super-bowl-revealed-a...

reply
SrslyJosh
2 hours ago
[-]
I think that the ideas of AI boosters and other tech maximalists will pretty much always "struggle to land" with normal people. (See also: the ring ad.)
reply
roganp
3 hours ago
[-]
I hope everyone will remember how eagerly AMZN's subsidiary was willing to sell it's cameras to whomever was willing to pay.
reply
dgxyz
3 hours ago
[-]
This is a temporary rollback while there’s a choice to speak against it.

Cloud connected doorbells must die as well as dragnet surveillance.

reply
dylan604
2 hours ago
[-]
> Cloud connected doorbells must die as well as dragnet surveillance.

I'd disagree and restate that cloud services willing to make these kinds of deals must die, painfully, in a fire after being stung by a million killer bees, after receiving a million paper cuts and having lemon juice poured all over them.

It is possible for a company to charge a monthly fee to provide a service and only that service without attempting to leverage their users and their data for any other form of income. Companies used to do it all of the time. It just takes a C-suite/board/founder to have the moral fortitude to not sell out their users.

reply
trinsic2
1 hour ago
[-]
The problem now is how can you trust any of these companies? The infrastructure is there to link this data if you have cameras that connect to the internet. How can you ever be sure this wont happen in secret? We have no guarantees that companies will follow the laws and laws are not even being enforced.
reply
antonvs
2 hours ago
[-]
> It just takes a C-suite/board/founder to have the moral fortitude ...

Just for context, could you provide some examples of such people?

reply
macki0
1 hour ago
[-]
Craig Newmark (Craigslist) and Jimmy Wales (Wikipedia) come to mind, both founders could have made platfoms that would have been ad-ridden (and made a boat full of cash) but the founders chose not to
reply
camillomiller
1 hour ago
[-]
No it is not. Your mandate is to grow your company’s revenue and profits, not act according to your conscience as an executive, especially if something is not illegal.

This is why regulations are extremely important. There need to be a strong enough counterincentive or companies will eventually always follow the path of least resistance to growth. Ethics when present may create some form of friction along some specific paths, but it’s never enough for those to not become, eventually, that very path.

reply
kulahan
32 minutes ago
[-]
"Companies primarily consider profit" is not the gotcha you think it is. It's possible to consider profit via goodwill towards customers. A number of companies do this. This doesn't mean that you're inherently wrong, but this argument certainly isn't the right one.
reply
dylan604
54 minutes ago
[-]
You can easily put it into the corporate charter that you will not "do evil". At that point, you have a mandate to grow revenue while abiding by the charter..

Just because majority of people choose to be assholes does not mean everyone has to be. Be the change you wish to see in the world, or something

reply
ProllyInfamous
3 hours ago
[-]
I worked in large union data centers, decades ago.

Cannot even imagine what is going on these days, inside & out.

reply
ohyoutravel
3 hours ago
[-]
Can you elaborate? This is interesting
reply
ProllyInfamous
2 hours ago
[-]
I worked across several facilities and obviously cannot talk specifics about those. It is public knowledge that one of them housed a large metro area's main ISP "meet-me room."

During Snowden revelations I'd already been apprenticing for years; nothing Edward documented surprised me. I'd literally walk around our 500,000sqft elevated floors knodding my head [none of this exists, officially].

----

Nothing is as it seems.

----

During DEF CON ~XX~ (approximately same timeframe as story above) it was publicly revealed that intelligence communities had redefined the word "intercept," to mean when a human operator catelogs a certain piece of data/traffic (i.e. not algorithms sorting). #1984 #newspeak #elevenyearsago

----

I no longer carry a cell phone. Don't use email. PO Box in profile

reply
King-Aaron
2 hours ago
[-]
> I no longer carry a cell phone.

I'm not quite there yet, but after Netanyahu made that comment like "if you have a phone you're carrying a little piece of Israel with you" right after the pager attack stuff.. I keep the phone in the back of my backpack away from my meat bits.

reply
dgxyz
2 hours ago
[-]
Yeah well aware of that stuff here. Two companies I worked at had entirely airgapped infrastructure because they knew the adversarial situation wasn't winnable. Everything was checked for implants at goods in. It's shocking some of the shit that goes on.

I run grey man where I can. Stuff that's private stays private. Paper and physical security is still good.

reply
doctor_radium
2 hours ago
[-]
Agreed, but this would then inconvenience millions of non-techies.

Could a solution be forcing Amazon (and Google and Flock and...) to open their backend software either for self-hosting or for running on somebody else's "cloud"? So subscribing to such a device isn't that different from getting web hosting from Dreamhost or Hetzner?

Maybe there's a host or IP field in the settings that users can easily change?

reply
syntheticnature
2 hours ago
[-]
If there was an IP setting users could change, all the self-hosting etc. forums would be talking about how to change it instead of explaining other options. I'd expect not just fixed hosts and an ecosystem dependent on their proprietary protocols, but also pinned certificates and secure boot so you can't change any of it.

N.B. Flock isn't really targeting the consumer market.

reply
dgxyz
2 hours ago
[-]
I know this is not constructive, but fuck 'em and their convenience!
reply
bwoah
2 hours ago
[-]
reply
vgeek
3 hours ago
[-]
Spiderman pointing at Spiderman?
reply
RupertSalt
3 hours ago
[-]
Daily Struggle over two buttons labeled "RECOVER LOST PUPPY" and "DEPORT NEIGHBORS"
reply
bagels
2 hours ago
[-]
Is it a struggle for them? Clearly they're pressing both buttons.
reply
hikkerl
2 hours ago
[-]
Who wouldn't?
reply
lovich
1 hour ago
[-]
People who aren’t psychopaths.

To be clear, I’m claiming you are one based on that question.

reply
dgxyz
3 hours ago
[-]
The tech industry is a bloody Spider-Man pointing orgy at this point.
reply
culi
3 hours ago
[-]
The success case for much of silicon valley seems to be government contracts. Gov't is the polite way of saying military
reply
sneak
2 hours ago
[-]
> Following intense backlash to its partnership with Flock Safety, a surveillance technology company that works with law enforcement agencies, Ring has announced it is canceling the integration.

Ring (owned by Amazon, who runs a private airgapped AWS region for the CIA onsite at Langley) also works with law enforcement agencies.

reply
RupertSalt
3 hours ago
[-]
Now whenever the cameras detect a lost dog, all your neighbors' phones begin playing "Angel" by Sarah McLachlan
reply
throwway120385
2 hours ago
[-]
They also play this when the cameras in your house detect you using more than one square of toilet paper at a time.
reply
SilverElfin
1 hour ago
[-]
Too little too late. I’m cancelling prime and returning my ring camera, even past the return deadline. Andy Jassy funded that Melania documentary and is generally a spineless oligarchic friend of the Trump administration. Amazon is basically anti constitutional.
reply
mrcwinn
2 hours ago
[-]
An aside: The Verge’s paywall is ridiculous, especially given that they still live off slimy affiliate revenue and ads that run directly counter to their own editorializing. Their smugness and superiority given their business model makes me wish we had better alternatives.
reply
donohoe
1 hour ago
[-]
The writers and editors don’t dictate how the business side monetizes the content.
reply
murillians
3 hours ago
[-]
Meaning they’ll wait until about June and then quietly roll it out
reply
andrei_says_
1 hour ago
[-]
No one being surprised at this statement is an indication of how much enshittification and betrayal we have agreed to accept.

I’d like to acknowledge the damage I carry as a human being as a result of the pressure to pretend that this is normal. Just because there doesn’t seem to be real alternatives in so many areas of this “free market” /s economy.

reply
ehnto
25 minutes ago
[-]
It has been a long decent. I blame advertising, because I doubt we would have put up with as much enshittification if the majority of our digital lives wasn't free, paid for by advertising, like it currently is.
reply
cal_dent
34 minutes ago
[-]
We live in a world where the powerful deceive us. We know they lie. They know we know they lie. They don't care. We say we care but do nothing
reply
ToucanLoucan
2 hours ago
[-]
Yep. Anyone got alternatives? I love the convenience of a video doorbell but I really really would like to not help the police or ICE or anyone else for that matter unless I decide it's a good idea.
reply
baby_souffle
2 hours ago
[-]
> Yep. Anyone got alternatives?

The self-hosted and home-automation and home-assistant subreddits are _full_ of discussion threads on this. The good news is that you have a TON of options to pick from. The bad news is that they're all deficient in one way or another so you really do have to spend a bit of time to figure out who executes best on the things you care most about.

If you don't mind the lock-in, Unifi is nice. Reolink (and the other DaHua re-brands) usually leave a lot to be desired in terms of software / quality but they are cheap and they reliably spit out a regular video stream that can be used with just about any software. Just don't let them onto the WAN!

reply
yndoendo
2 hours ago
[-]
Are there any such systems for general users that don't want to manage or maintain such systems?

Alternatives really need to be for the masses that have little Knowles in server hosting.

This is one reason I invest in Linux Smartphone company's that are work towards a clean solution for the masses. Daily drivers that are satisfactory for us build the stepping stones to walk to the alternative.

reply
cmorgan31
43 minutes ago
[-]
UniFi is simple to keep running and updated. It’s mostly plug and play as long as you have Ethernet lines. You sometimes have to hit update in the iPhone app.
reply
Cyph0n
2 hours ago
[-]
Home Assistant has the plug and play Green box: https://www.home-assistant.io/green/

Hubitat is a different player in this space: https://hubitat.com/

reply
dyauspitr
1 hour ago
[-]
Any non-Chinese, plug and play systems? Does simplisafe offer on premise video surveillance?
reply
jszymborski
2 hours ago
[-]
Reolink has doorbell cameras[0] that you can keep disconnected from the internet. They also have some pretty useful local recording hubs if self-hosting is not your deal[1].

[0] https://reolink.com/ca/product/reolink-video-doorbell-wifi/

[1] https://reolink.com/ca/product/reolink-home-hub/

reply
dawnerd
1 hour ago
[-]
Reolink also fixed a problem with some of their cameras that prevented them from working with scrypted fully. I have a bunch now completely isolated from the internet and linked through HomeKit.
reply
keraf
2 hours ago
[-]
Got the UniFi Doorbell from Ubiquiti and I'm really happy with it. It's hooked up to my Dream Machine, records video on disk and I access it via Tailscale. Not paying any subscription and it doesn't live in a cloud.
reply
andrewxdiamond
2 hours ago
[-]
you can use a company that is self hosted like Unifi and have complete control over your data, still have remote access, and not pay a subscription. “self hosted” scares people off but its literally a box you plug in and forget about. Pretty trivial.

I dont understand why anyone chooses Ring when the costs of Unifi are so much better.

The ring app also sucks imo and all their hardware is quite slow.

reply
bagels
2 hours ago
[-]
Honestly, that commercial convinced me to dump my Nest cameras because, eventually (if not already), they'll do the same.
reply
marricks
2 hours ago
[-]
Normal door bells are pretty great and have less overhead and maintenance...

All tech puts it's best foot forward, some of it's really nifty, but a camera on every street corner is always going to pose more risks than it's worth IMO...

It's work to go back to the old ways but I think this is one we step we should really all take.

reply
Marsymars
1 hour ago
[-]
I think your take on cameras is legitimate, but from my home office I can't hear my doorbell if I have the door closed or if I have music playing at even a low volume. Installing a smart doorbell that notifies me when rung was a significant upgrade over the old doorbell.
reply
acidburnNSA
1 hour ago
[-]
Frigate is incredible. I have 3 instances of it (different homes across the family) running using various amcrest and reolink local-only PoE and Wifi cams. I access the remotely using wireguard. One is running on a 2017 miniatx box (Intel i7-7700T) using openvino to do local-only object detection with the 2017 intel CPU. One is using a Beelink EQ14 Mini PC, Intel Twin Lake N150, also using openvino for object detection (people, dogs, cars, etc). One is using a nvidia 5070 gpu. All notifications are processed via the home assistant integration.

Truly top-notch quality, full-featured, very low maintenance, easy to set up, cheap to operate. I'm glad so many people are using it now.

For video doorbell I just have a cam that can see the front door and I drew a box around the area I want notifications for. When a person enters the box, I get a notification and snapshot.

https://docs.frigate.video/

reply
rtkwe
2 hours ago
[-]
I use Amcrest's AD410. I don't pay for their cloud, have my own NVR, and can access them through Wireguard if I'm out of the house.
reply
acidburnNSA
1 hour ago
[-]
This is the way. Do you use frigate for NVR or something else?
reply
nerdsniper
2 hours ago
[-]
Reolink with Frigate NVR. Can also put Home Assistant on the same box. Pretty much any 12+ gen intel CPU with QSV should be able to handle the encoding for streaming to your device. Probably will want to use tailscale so that you don’t have to open any ports.
reply
lightingthedark
2 hours ago
[-]
I have a Reolink doorbell. It records to a SD card and works great with my Home Assistant setup. So much better than the Ring it replaced.
reply
jayofdoom
2 hours ago
[-]
Hard agree. I have their doorbell and some of the wifi light fixtures (that go into mains power). They integrate great with home assistant and record locally.
reply
roamerz
1 hour ago
[-]
I’ve been pretty happy with Reolink. No subscription required and uses local storage. Notifications are done through smtp which works pretty well. Mobile app is pretty solid as well.
reply
dgxyz
2 hours ago
[-]
We've got an analogue video phone on our apartment. Works flawlessly. No digital path other than the ring selection. Has a flat monochrome CRT which is kind of cool.

I made it half a century without a doorbell in my phone. I don't need it now.

reply
kstrauser
2 hours ago
[-]
Eh. I have a Logitech Circle View, and appreciate seeing whether it's a delivery person or some rando selling vacuum cleaners. It also pops up a picture of the person on our TV and chimes my phone, so even if we have the music up or we're not at home, we can still see that someone's there. I like these.
reply
add-sub-mul-div
26 minutes ago
[-]
The difficult lesson is that getting off the treadmill of always chasing greater convenience is the only way to stop the bleeding of increasing dependence on technology.
reply
righthand
2 hours ago
[-]
Yi cameras are supposed to be local if you dont get a subscription.
reply
LazyMans
2 hours ago
[-]
None of these agencies get your video data without your consent. The feature was designed so they have an easy way to present you the request for footage.

Unfortunately a portion of the information getting circulated is the complete opposite.

reply
drnick1
1 hour ago
[-]
> None of these agencies get your video data without your consent.

You certainly can't be sure of that. In fact, it is almost certain that these companies provide the data they collect to the police and government agencies data, often without warrant.

reply
i_love_retros
2 hours ago
[-]
Doesn't matter, unless you're an asshole you shouldn't continue to give money to companies like Ring that partner with ICE or Flock.

I'm not an asshole so I cancelled my subscription.

reply
array_key_first
2 hours ago
[-]
Yes, for now. But ultimately you have no control or say over these features because you do not own the software or data. You must have pure blind faith that this will be the way it continues to work.

If other people are cool with doing things without any reasons and based on pure trust, that's on them. But that's not gonna be me

reply
SoftTalker
1 hour ago
[-]
If you don't own the entire stack you don't decide who does what with the data.
reply
wat10000
2 hours ago
[-]
I'm certain they get your video data without your consent when the agencies have a warrant. I think it's very likely that they won't necessarily require a warrant, either.

Consider the Nancy Guthrie case. The owner wasn't around to give consent, and the camera didn't even have an active subscription, yet law enforcement was still able to recover video from Google's systems.

The only way it could be as you say is if the video was only stored locally without any remote access, or if the video was encrypted with keys only you control. Google clearly is not doing this. I really, really doubt Amazon is.

reply
nipperkinfeet
3 hours ago
[-]
Continue reading with a Verge subscription. Stop posting links to paywall sites.
reply
bwoah
2 hours ago
[-]
reply
GaryBluto
2 hours ago
[-]
I highly recommended setting up a hotkey for toggling JavaScript in your browser of choice.
reply