Read 11 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Airbnb will no longer allow hosts to use indoor security cameras, regardless of where they're placed or what they're used for. In an update on Monday, Airbnb says the change to "prioritize the privacy" of renters goes into effect on April 30th. From a report: The vacation rental app previously let hosts install security cameras in "common areas" of listings, including hallways, living rooms, and front doors. Airbnb required hosts to disclose the presence of security cameras in their listings and make them clearly visible, and it prohibited hosts from using cameras in bedrooms and bathrooms. But now, hosts can't use indoor security cameras at all. The change comes after numerous reports of guests finding hidden cameras within their rental, leading some vacation-goers to scan their rooms for cameras. Airbnb's new policy also introduces new rules for outdoor security cameras, and will now require hosts to disclose their use and locations before guests book a listing. Hosts can't use outdoor cams to keep tabs on indoor spaces, either, nor can they use them in "certain outdoor areas where there's a great expectation of privacy," such as an outdoor shower or sauna.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Airbnb is Banning Indoor Security Cameras

Read 16 remaining paragraphs | Comments

The Washington Post is reporting on the FBI’s increasing use of push notification data—”push tokens”—to identify people. The police can request this data from companies like Apple and Google without a warrant.

The investigative technique goes back years. Court orders that were issued in 2019 to Apple and Google demanded that the companies hand over information on accounts identified by push tokens linked to alleged supporters of the Islamic State terrorist group.

But the practice was not widely understood until December, when Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), in a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, said an investigation had revealed that the Justice Department had prohibited Apple and Google from discussing the technique.

[…]

Unlike normal app notifications, push alerts, as their name suggests, have the power to jolt a phone awake—a feature that makes them useful for the urgent pings of everyday use. Many apps offer push-alert functionality because it gives users a fast, battery-saving way to stay updated, and few users think twice before turning them on.

But to send that notification, Apple and Google require the apps to first create a token that tells the company how to find a user’s device. Those tokens are then saved on Apple’s and Google’s servers, out of the users’ reach.

The article discusses their use by the FBI, primarily in child sexual abuse cases. But we all know how the story goes:

“This is how any new surveillance method starts out: The government says we’re only going to use this in the most extreme cases, to stop terrorists and child predators, and everyone can get behind that,” said Cooper Quintin, a technologist at the advocacy group Electronic Frontier Foundation.

“But these things always end up rolling downhill. Maybe a state attorney general one day decides, hey, maybe I can use this to catch people having an abortion,” Quintin added. “Even if you trust the U.S. right now to use this, you might not trust a new administration to use it in a way you deem ethical.”

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Video doorbell cameras have been commoditized to the point where they're available for $30-$40 on marketplaces like Amazon, Walmart, Temu, and Shein. The true cost of owning one might be much greater, however. Consumer Reports (CR) has released the findings of a security investigation into two budget-minded doorbell brands, Eken and Tuck, which are largely the same hardware produced by the Eken Group in China, according to CR. The cameras are further resold under at least 10 more brands. The cameras are set up through a common mobile app, Aiwit. And the cameras share something else, CR claims: "troubling security vulnerabilities." Among the camera's vulnerabilities cited by CR: - Sending public IP addresses and Wi-Fi SSIDs (names) over the Internet without encryption - Takeover of the cameras by putting them into pairing mode (which you can do from a front-facing button on some models) and connecting through the Aiwit app - Access to still images from the video feed and other information by knowing the camera's serial number. CR also noted that Eken cameras lacked an FCC registration code. More than 4,200 were sold in January 2024, according to CR, and often held an Amazon "Overall Pick" label (as one model did when an Ars writer looked on Wednesday). CR issued vulnerability disclosures to Eken and Tuck regarding its findings. The disclosures note the amount of data that is sent over the network without authentication, including JPEG files, the local SSID, and external IP address. It notes that after a malicious user has re-paired a doorbell with a QR code generated by the Aiwit app, they have complete control over the device until a user sees an email from Eken and reclaims the doorbell. "These video doorbells from little known manufacturers have serious security and privacy vulnerabilities, and now they've found their way onto major digital marketplaces such as Amazon and Walmart," said Justin Brookman, director of tech policy at Consumer Reports, in a statement. "Both the manufacturers and platforms that sell the doorbells have a responsibility to ensure that these products are not putting consumers in harm's way."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Cheap Doorbell Cameras Can Be Easily Hijacked, Says Consumer Reports

Like millions of doting parents, I wanted to keep others abreast of my child’s milestones. But the ‘likes’ weren’t worth the risks

Social media is a strange place. On the one hand it can be a relentlessly toxic, dark cluster of ill intent; on the other, it can act as the glue that binds us to new communities, friends of the past and family we’ve almost forgotten. Nostalgia kicks in when we scroll through Instagram or Facebook and see life milestones from decades gone by. It’s a gentle reminder of life’s simple preciousness.

That’s why it makes perfect sense that, according to some estimates, 42% of parents in Britain share photos of their children online. More than 50% of those parents share these photos at least once a month. A 2018 report by the children’s commissioner found that parents share about 71 photos and 29 videos of their child every year on social media. On average, by the time the child is aged 13, parents have posted 1,300 photos and videos of them to social media.

Continue reading...

Read 11 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Read 9 remaining paragraphs | Comments