White picket fences, neatly mowed lawns, winding streets and “secured by ADT” signs are among the hallmarks of American suburbia. A possible new addition to this pantheon has exploded in popularity in recent years: the ubiquitous Ring doorbell.
Ring and similar smart security technology use cameras to send video feeds to residents’ mobile devices. Amazon acquired Ring in 2018 and it has since become a key part of the company’s product line.
In short, Ring’s business model is to offer the actual equipment at a relatively low cost while charging a monthly subscription. The model is clearly successful — millions of families, including mine, have bought Ring products. The smart home security market was valued at $3.7 billion in 2023 and is projected to reach $15.7 billion by 2031.
Smart security systems — from internet-connected cameras to Ring’s intelligent doorbells — promise peace of mind through constant surveillance and real-time alerts. But as we entrust more of our safety to digital solutions, an important question emerges: Does smart security really make us safer?
At first glance, the answer seems obvious. Smart security devices offer features that traditional systems simply can’t match. Homeowners can monitor their properties remotely through video feeds, receive instant notifications of suspicious activity and even communicate with visitors via video doorbells. These advancements undoubtedly provide a sense of control and immediate response that old-fashioned locks and alarms cannot offer.
A separation exists, though, between feeling safe and truly being safe. Both are important and even intertwined. We often take preventative measures to feel safer even if they don’t actually make us safer. That said, some attempts to feel safer can have adverse effects. Smart security certainly makes us feel safer, but its ultimate safety record is more dubious. According to an article in Scientific American, there is very little published evidence that video doorbells deter crime.
The drawbacks of these products are often under-discussed. One significant issue is their vulnerability to hacking. As with any device connected to the internet, smart security systems are susceptible to cyberattacks from malicious actors. Hackers can potentially gain access to security cameras, door locks and other connected devices, turning tools meant to protect us into instruments that compromise our privacy and safety. For example, in California, burglars have used Wi-Fi jammers to block video doorbells and cameras.
Additionally, a study by MIT’s Media Lab revealed that Ring doorbells and similar alternatives lead to incidents of residents racially profiling the people they see on camera and claiming criminal activity where there is none. It is fairly common to see people on the app post Ring footage of “suspicious-looking people” at their front door. Maybe these are truly nefarious people. But there are often simpler answers. Perhaps someone got the wrong address, or it was a political canvasser. Smart home security taps into our biological bias to assume the worst. It is not a coincidence that we trust our neighbors less now than ever.
I want to emphasize that our society’s increasing fixation on crime is belied by the fact that crime has gone down in recent years. The problem is perhaps that it is more visible now than ever before. I have previously written about how social media apps, like the neighborhood app Nextdoor, can fuel unwarranted paranoia about crime.
It is also worth looking at this question from another perspective — not as residents but as citizens. Because people have access to footage of others, they feel entitled to share it without any concern for what the parties in the footage might think. Is the funny but embarrassing thing your delivery driver did really okay to share online? What if it were you that took a nosedive after tripping on the stairs? Video surveillance and the prospect of virality lead us to shun our morals.
Security camera owners can ironically become the perpetrators in another Hitchcockian way. A survey found that one in four homeowners admit to spying on their neighbors using technology. Of course, this is none of their business, but few state or federal laws regulate the use of surveillance cameras.
Another concern is the potential for data misuse. Smart security devices collect vast amounts of data. This data is often stored on cloud servers, which, despite security measures, are not infallible. The question of who has access to this data and how it is used becomes pertinent. Could it be sold to third parties, used for targeted advertising or even handed over to law enforcement without consent? The privacy implications are profound and troubling.
As we increasingly rely on smart security systems like Ring to safeguard our homes, it’s crucial to recognize their limitations and potential downsides. While they offer convenience and a sense of control, their effectiveness in truly deterring crime remains highly questionable. Vulnerabilities to hacking, data misuse and the promotion of unwarranted paranoia highlight the complexities of these technologies. Ultimately, feeling safe and being safe are not always the same.
Hayden Buckfire is an Opinion Columnist who writes about American politics and culture. He can be reached at haybuck@umich.edu.
The post Does smart security really make us safer? appeared first on The Michigan Daily.
Leave a Reply