1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. MISC.PHONE.MOBILE.IPHONE

  • OT: Amazon "Black Mirror" experience

    From Alan Browne@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jun 15 16:54:09 2023
    Amazon locks man out of his "smart home" account due to delivery
    driver's false report. In turn he could not operate devices connected
    to that account:

    https://medium.com/@bjax_/a-tale-of-unwanted-disruption-my-week-without-amazon-df1074e3818b

    NEVER - EVER get a home system that is not 100% in your sole control.

    If an outside co. has the ability to take control, or deny control of
    your lights, doors, cameras, etc., it is not worth the risk.

    --
    “If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything."
    -Ronald Coase

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Campbell@21:1/5 to Alan Browne on Thu Jun 15 21:54:22 2023
    Alan Browne <[email protected]> wrote:

    Amazon locks man out of his "smart home" account due to delivery
    driver's false report. In turn he could not operate devices connected
    to that account:

    To be fair, no one was “locked out of their house”. Alexa would not reply. HUGE difference.


    https://medium.com/@bjax_/a-tale-of-unwanted-disruption-my-week-without-amazon-df1074e3818b

    NEVER - EVER get a home system that is not 100% in your sole control.

    If an outside co. has the ability to take control, or deny control of
    your lights, doors, cameras, etc., it is not worth the risk.

    It would never occur to me to do something this stupid. I don’t need or want to control my house lights/doors/cameras via a computer “assistant”.


    What could possibly go wrong?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jolly Roger@21:1/5 to Alan Browne on Thu Jun 15 22:26:44 2023
    On 2023-06-15, Alan Browne <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 2023-06-15 17:54, Bob Campbell wrote:
    Alan Browne <[email protected]> wrote:

    NEVER - EVER get a home system that is not 100% in your sole
    control.

    If an outside co. has the ability to take control, or deny control
    of your lights, doors, cameras, etc., it is not worth the risk.

    It would never occur to me to do something this stupid. I don’t
    need or want to control my house lights/doors/cameras via a computer
    “assistant”.

    There are various automations I would like. Certainly would be nice
    to check cameras while I'm away.

    That's easy to do with zero companies having access to your cameras or
    video feeds, and no third-party servers involved. Standard network
    cameras and a self-run video server are all you need.

    Allow friends into my house with a remote command - or set up a
    password for them to have keyless entry. And do so remotely if
    needed.

    Smart locks are often horribly insecure. Personally, I'd rather just
    give trusted guests a key and use bump- and pick-resistant door locks.

    --
    E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
    I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

    JR

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan Browne@21:1/5 to Bob Campbell on Thu Jun 15 18:15:25 2023
    On 2023-06-15 17:54, Bob Campbell wrote:
    Alan Browne <[email protected]> wrote:

    Amazon locks man out of his "smart home" account due to delivery
    driver's false report. In turn he could not operate devices connected
    to that account:

    To be fair, no one was “locked out of their house”.

    Where did I or the article say that?

    I wrote: < locks man out of his "smart home" account >
    =======


    https://medium.com/@bjax_/a-tale-of-unwanted-disruption-my-week-without-amazon-df1074e3818b

    NEVER - EVER get a home system that is not 100% in your sole control.

    If an outside co. has the ability to take control, or deny control of
    your lights, doors, cameras, etc., it is not worth the risk.

    It would never occur to me to do something this stupid. I don’t need or want to control my house lights/doors/cameras via a computer “assistant”.

    There are various automations I would like.
    Certainly would be nice to check cameras while I'm away.
    Allow friends into my house with a remote command - or set up a password
    for them to have keyless entry. And do so remotely if needed.
    Etc. and so on.

    The point is not to allow a company outside your control to be able to
    do anything with your systems from the outside.

    Whatever servers, etc. that I would need for such: I would own and run.

    What could possibly go wrong?

    If I set it up and control it, not very much.
    And any errors will be in my realm to fix.

    --
    “If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything."
    -Ronald Coase

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan Browne@21:1/5 to Jolly Roger on Thu Jun 15 19:39:47 2023
    On 2023-06-15 18:26, Jolly Roger wrote:
    On 2023-06-15, Alan Browne <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 2023-06-15 17:54, Bob Campbell wrote:
    Alan Browne <[email protected]> wrote:

    NEVER - EVER get a home system that is not 100% in your sole
    control.

    If an outside co. has the ability to take control, or deny control
    of your lights, doors, cameras, etc., it is not worth the risk.

    It would never occur to me to do something this stupid. I don’t
    need or want to control my house lights/doors/cameras via a computer
    “assistant”.

    There are various automations I would like. Certainly would be nice
    to check cameras while I'm away.

    That's easy to do with zero companies having access to your cameras or
    video feeds, and no third-party servers involved. Standard network
    cameras and a self-run video server are all you need.

    Yep - and the time and notion to do it.

    Main take is stay away from companies that want to be intertwined in
    your life.


    Allow friends into my house with a remote command - or set up a
    password for them to have keyless entry. And do so remotely if
    needed.

    Smart locks are often horribly insecure. Personally, I'd rather just
    give trusted guests a key and use bump- and pick-resistant door locks.

    I know - why I haven't bought any to date.
    LPL refers.

    --
    “If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything."
    -Ronald Coase

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)