Ring's Security Woes Cause Some Tech Review Sites to Rethink Glowing Endorsements

Image for article titled Ring's Security Woes Cause Some Tech Review Sites to Rethink Glowing Endorsements
Photo: Stephen Brashear (Getty

At least two tech review sites are discussing whether to rescind their positive recommendations of Ring’s home surveillance cameras, a leading digital-rights organization announced this week.


In the wake of reporting by Gizmodo and other outlets this year concerning Ring’s troubled security and privacy practices, Fight for the Future has launched a campaign calling on tech review sites, such as Consumer Reports and PC Magazine, to suspend recommending Ring products.

“Tech reviews and guides play an important role in people deciding which devices to buy,” said Evan Greer, deputy director of Fight for the Future.

Ring, acquired by Amazon in 2018, has recently become the target of hackers looking to harass and frighten owners of its home security cameras. Thousands of passwords belonging to Ring owners have been spread online, granting virtually anyone access to the indoor camera feeds. Startling footage acquired by a local Tennessee news outlet this month showed a voice emanating from a Ring camera equipped with a speaker that was installed in a child’s bedroom.

Ring has placed the blame for these incidents on the device owners themselves, saying they failed to adopt unique passwords or make use of the two-factor authentication security feature offered by the company. Ring otherwise says its devices are helping to curb crime in neighborhoods by dissuading package thieves and would-be burglars.

The company’s partnerships with some 700 law enforcement agencies across the country has drawn equal scrutiny from privacy advocates and organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union and Electronic Frontier Foundation. The controversial agreements Ring seeks with police departments ultimately grant it control over what public officials can say about its products.


A group of U.S. senators—worried that control of Amazon’s vast surveillance network could fall into the hands of hackers and foreign spies—expressed their concerns about Ring to Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos in a letter last month. “Ring devices routinely upload data, including video records, to Amazon’s servers. Amazon therefore holds a vast amount of deeply sensitive data and video footage detailing the lives of Americans in and near their homes,” the letter said.


Last week, the tech review site Wirecutter announced it was suspending its recommendation of Ring products citing a report about a data leak by BuzzFeed’s Caroline Haskins. This prompted Fight for the Future to contact other review sites and ask them to rescind their recommendations as well.

In a press release, Fight for the Future also pointed to a blog by Gizmodo’s Adam Clark Estes, which instructs readers to avoid purchasing Ring devices for themselves or anyone else and look at buying other similar devices, such as the Nest Hello doorbell, instead.


“Just steer clear of Ring,” Estes wrote.

Fight for the Future said Consumer Reports and Tom’s Guide, two popular review sites, were discussing options internally. Several other sites, including PC Magazine, Safety.com, and Digital Trends, reportedly didn’t respond to the group’s emails.


“The reviewers we’ve reached out to recommended Ring as the best in their category. Meanwhile, report after report details security issues, concerns, and leaks with Ring technology,” Greer told Gizmodo. “These devices are not safe. It’s important reviewers honor the public trust and suspend their recommendation.”

Update, 12/25: Tom’s Guide has published an explanation of why it has no plans to rescind its recommendation that consumers buy Ring cameras. Despite additional shortcomings in Ring’s security policies outlined by Motherboard this week, Tom’s Guide says it believes the company is not fully to blame for the problems plaguing Ring customers.


“Is Ring completely absolved of blame? Not in the least. It should have done a better job at demanding users turn on two-factor authentication, and its lack of transparency with regards to its cooperation with police departments brings up all sorts of privacy concerns,” the site says.

The site’s explanation includes additional security tips for Ring users, all of which you can read here.  




I always saw the warnings of a dystopian future in various fictional works — most famously, of course, Nineteen Eighty-Four, with Big Brother and whatnot. Then came other works like V for Vendetta, Minority Report, or even Demolition Man (which, while comedic, is scarily prophetic).

The concept of Big Brother was always frightening, but it was also greatly exaggerated. The takeaway was supposed to be the warning of what could be if we’re not cognizant of the world around us, if we’re not vigilant. The takeaway was supposed to be that personal freedom is more valuable than anything else — never exchange it for anything. The takeaway was supposed to be to trust nothing, and question everything.

Little did I know that Big Brother would not only be voluntarily welcomed into everyone’s home, but people would actually pay money to do so.

Privacy and anonymity are the most valuable commodity a person online has. Surely an organization would have to fight tooth and nail for the smallest details about an individual.

How would an organization (corporate or government) ever get a peek behind the curtain? How would they ever know a person’s real name instead of a username? How would they know what a person looks like? How would they know where people eat or where they shop? How would they know where people have been on a particular day? How would they ever see or hear conversations behind closed doors?

All they had to do was ask.