>backdoor for police into your glasses like they did for amazon ring?
Citation needed, please. To the best of my knowledge there is no back door for police in ring gear. They can request video from users, but there is no requirement it be given up and the request can be denied.
> They can request video from users, but there is no requirement it be given up and the request can be denied.
If you refuse they have a deal with amazon to hand it over to them anyway.
"However, he noted, there is a workaround if a resident happens to reject a police request. If the community member doesn’t want to supply a Ring video that seems vital to a local law enforcement investigation, police can contact Amazon, which will then essentially “subpoena” the video.
“If we ask within 60 days of the recording and as long as it’s been uploaded to the cloud, then Ring can take it out of the cloud and send it to us legally so that we can use it as part of our investigation,” he said."
Police have also shown up at people's doors to intimidate them into handing over videos.
"Police have also told CNET in the past that they've shown up at known Ring users' doorsteps to request footage in person if the online requests don't pan out."
This shouldn't surprise you though. Basically any scrap of data you give to companies like apple google and amazon will be sucked up by the government at some level. Just the other day there was an article about how companies are hit with national security letters forbidding them from saying anything about the data collection going on, but we've known since Snowden's leaks that the NSA was collecting data from those companies already.
>“If we ask within 60 days of the recording and as long as it’s been uploaded to the cloud, then Ring can take it out of the cloud and send it to us legally so that we can use it as part of our investigation,” he said."
Just because someone says something doesn't mean it's true:
>"The reports that police can obtain any video from a Ring doorbell within 60 days is false," a spokesperson said. "Ring will not release customer information in response to government demands without a valid and binding legal demand properly served on us. Ring objects to overbroad or otherwise inappropriate demands as a matter of course. We are working with the Fresno County Sheriff's Office to ensure this is understood."
>"Police have also told CNET in the past that they've shown up at known Ring users' doorsteps to request footage in person if the online requests don't pan out."
This is shitty but not a back door, and it's also something police do if you have regular camera footage they think will help with an investigation too.
So the cop says they get whatever video they want no matter what, but Amazon's PR department says otherwise.
Maybe this was a NSL situation and the cop unintentionally spilled the beans, or maybe it's just weasel words by the amazon PR rep. Technically what they said specifically ("a valid and binding legal demand properly served on us") doesn't necessarily mean anything has to be signed off on by a judge. It just means the police have to make a legal and binding demand which shouldn't be a problem if handing that data over to police whenever they demand it is part of the binding terms of their contract with police.
I'll admit I'm not giving amazon or the police the benefit of the doubt here, but I also have zero reason to.
I think occam's razor here points towards the cop just having no clue how the system works. Amazon explicitly states they'll be reaching out to educate the dude on how it works, lol.
