Amazon faces class action lawsuit over Ring facial-recognition feature

https://techcrunch.com/2026/06/02/amazon-faces-class-action-lawsuit-over-ring-facial-recognition-feature/

by rolph • 2 months ago

49 10 2 months ago

Cider99863• 2 months ago

I appreciate there is still some stigma around facial-recognition in the U.S. I will not visit the U.K. until they fix their shit.

I've always been fine using Face ID or Touch ID because it's stored on device, but I'm curious if normies using it know that or they're okay with their biometrics being sent off their device.

calmbonsai• 2 months ago

I've never understood why anyone would be comfortable with Face ID or Touch ID given all the possible attacks. Just use a PIN. You'll end up knowing it as a kinesthetic reflexive action anyways.

Cider99863• 2 months ago

On GrapheneOS you can use a long passphrase for your primary unlock which you have to enter after a restart and for changing important settings, and a fingerprint+pin for 2fa as the secondary unlock. This is a great balance imo.

tencentshill2• 2 months ago

There were arguments against biometric authentication when touchID was added. It removes any plausible deniability that it wasn't you using the device.

Cider99863• 2 months ago

To obtain plausible deniability you would have to take immense steps and need specific knowledge like using gloves and avoiding surveillance cameras, so I don't think anyone that is going for that would be affected by the option to use biometrics.

sparkler123• 2 months ago

I have local cameras and a local NVR running Scrypted that does facial recognition. I get notifications when the kids get home from school or my MIL comes over. No cloud component. The cameras can capture incidental views of the street but are primarily looking at my property.

I'm sure if I wanted to I could find a person and figure out when they walk their dog every day. Am I violating their privacy? Do I need to turn it off? They didn't opt-in to my system.

I think there's a distinction between potentially networked use of mass surveillance and an individual user doing it on their property.

If you're using Ring, and Ring could isolate all your data and not share it, is that acceptable? Is the issue that this data resides on a company's server and not an individual's?

I totally get not wanting to be an unwilling part of mass surveillance, but people err on "all cameras are mass surveillance" when it's not true.

wyre• 2 months ago

I would rather assume "all cameras are mass surveillance" than trust them in good faith.

The issue with Ring cameras is the unconsensual facial recognition while Amazon owns all of the data and based on their superbowl add, will use the data for mass surveillance.

I'm sure if you wanted to track your neighbors, that is acceptable under the law, but law ≠ morality and we should be doing more to hold these trillion dollar companies accountable. Mass surveillance is not okay, no matter what any laws say about it.

brendoelfrendo• 2 months ago

"All cameras that share video footage with a third party are mass surveillance" is a pretty reasonable stance, imo.

Xfx7028• 2 months ago

Can you share more about your hardware setup? I am planning on installing something like this, but I am in the very early stages.

tencentshill2• 2 months ago

Make sure the camera supports RTSP and/or ONVIF. ANNKE[0] are rebranded hikvision cameras that are much cheaper and can operate on your LAN with an NVR of your choice. The hardware is high quality enough that Ubiquiti uses the design and sells them for 2x the price.[1]

[0] https://www.annke.com/products/b0f8my4pjt

This model is even cheaper on ebay https://www.ebay.com/itm/285309655395

[1] https://store.ui.com/us/en/category/cameras-dome-turret/prod...

Amazon faces class action lawsuit over Ring facial-recognition feature

Related Stories