Ring, a subsidiary of Amazon and specializing in domestic security services, has admitted that it collaborates with 407 police stations in the United States to provide them with access to user’s security cameras.

In 2018, the Amazon company closed one of its many seemingly infallible investments: Ring, the start-up dedicated to commercialize surveillance cameras that allow its buyers to contemplate in real time what is happening both inside and outside their homes.

Its flagship product, a video surveillance bell that is installed at the door of each home, costs less than 200 euros and facilitates a permanent streaming of the entry threshold, and only open to each user. A priori, a perfect security tool. So you can know what is happening in your house at any moment, wherever you are.

The Ring Neighbors program represents an unusual partnership between the US technology company and law enforcement agencies in that country, through which they have offered Ring devices for free or at a discount for residents as part of efforts to prevent crime.

Ring, the device manufacturer bought by Amazon for $ 839 million, said that the smart video doorbell and its associated applications help improve communication between villagers and their respective police departments. Shortening the response times and, therefore, even preventing crimes that would otherwise be more complicated to solve.

The company has, among some of its products, a popular doorbell that connects to a home security camera (techniques aimed at automating a home). An eye that sees objects and people approaching the users’ doors and sends it through the internet to alert the user.

But, in turn, it has begun to serve as a tool to fight crime or, at least, to help in police investigations. Thousands of cameras that work with the security forces, controlling what is collected around them.

Through the application, it is possible for law enforcement to interact with your local community. “We wanted to facilitate work on security among all members of the community and we invited local agencies to participate in these discussions,” he adds.

This also includes “spreading important information about crimes and security acts in your neighborhoods” and “asking for help in active investigations by issuing video recording requests,” Siminoff explained.

“The neighbors and the local police have achieved surprising results by working together through the Neighbors application, from taking stolen weapons from the streets to helping families keep their children safe and even recover stolen medical supplies for a diabetic child.”

Users receive an alert when the doorbell rings or the camera detects movement and the user can choose to watch the live broadcast of their camera using a mobile application. Users also have the option to share images on Ring’s public social network, Neighbors, which allows people to report local crimes, discuss suspicious incidents and share videos from their cameras, cell phones and other Ring devices.

Approximately one third of publications in Neighbors are by “suspicious activity” or “unknown visitors,” the company told The Washington Post. About a quarter of the messages are related to crimes and a fifth is about lost pets.

 Concern over privacy violation

In spite of the company’s statements, the collaboration between the Police and the surveillance systems caused concern in society about the possibility that this cooperation involves the violation of the privacy of Ring users. Thus, law professor Andrew Guthrie Ferguson points out that Ring takes advantage of “fears about crime and security” and thus has found a method to develop “a completely new surveillance network” without control that would have accompanied a similar project driven by the authorities

For his part, Evan Greer, of the Fight for the Future digital rights advocacy group, believes that the project represents “a business model based on paranoia.” “It is a private management surveillance network built outside the democratic process, but they are promoting it like any other product, just another application,” he highlighted.

Matthew Guariglia, of the Electronic Frontier Foundation group, believes that the system takes advantage of people because of their fear of crime. “This creates a vicious circle in which the police promote the adoption of Ring. Ring terrifies people to think their homes are in danger. Then Amazon sells more cameras,” he said.

But Amazon responded. And he called this information “deceptive” news about the program. On the other hand, different reports have discovered how most accusations have a racial component. The suspects are usually African-American, often mistakenly identified, which locks the shadow of doubt about any black man who passes through the area.

It is unlikely that the participation of the American police, famous for their racial biases, contributes to sifting victimization. Ring recalls that its moderators remove publications “that do not meet our community guidelines.” Not all users take good for private companies to work directly with governments. Especially if part of the collaboration involves the handling of information and personal data. For example, Apple, because of an error in its facial recognition system, helped send an innocent to jail.

The problem, according to privacy activists, is that the program could threaten civil liberties, make residents informants and harm innocent people, including those that Ring users have identified as suspects, subjecting them to greater vigilance.

For greater concern, Amazon plans to integrate its facial recognition technology, Rekognition, into Ring, which would allow users to receive detailed information on who is approaching the house in real time, “allowing […] to identify or not identify the forces of the public order, to family members, similar neighbors,” says the patent.

Rekognition has been tested with police departments without adequate guarantees, and applied to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE), provoking criticism from both Amazon employees and shareholders and the Democrats in Congress, who have sent several letters to Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, demanding more transparency