[aleksiy123]

I feel like I’m missing something.

There is someone that is making the decision right?

Or are you just saying the person placing the cameras is decoupled from the person making the decision to aggregate them all.

But I still feel like the accountability is on who is giving the access to sensitive cameras.

[l72]

We are opening up a wellness clinic and we were planning to use a managed service company for internet, network, and security. I was appalled by the managed services suggestions. Privacy of our patients and their data is critical, and the managed service company wants to send all of our feeds to third parties and give third parties direct access to our network.

We decided this was a privacy and security risk, and have gone in a completely different direction, but it would not surprise me if most businesses used one of these companies and just went with whatever they suggested without understanding at all what is at stake or who has access to the data.

[FireBeyond]

It's "hilarious" how incompetent some companies are.

One background check firm used by a previous employer of mine sent me an email saying:

"Hi FireBeyond, doing a background check, just want to verify that all these details for you are correct:

full legal name, address, dob, full ssn, phone number, USCIS#..."

and then the kicker:

"and also want to make sure we have the correct email address for you"

Oh. You just sent all this shit to an email address and "oh, let us know if this your email address"?!?

Meanwhile, they've found my fiancee on FB and are messaging her out of the blue to "verify" she knows me (to be clear, this was meant to be a standard background check, not a security clearance or anything similar).

To their credit, that employer, when I told them all this, were as horrified as I was and fired them as their background check provider.

[bluGill]

Most often the business hires a security contractor to take care of it, and signs the contract without understanding the terms. You should be able to trust your suppliers enough that you can do the above, they are the experts in the thing (cameras in this thing, but could be things like plumbing or accounting) and you have your own business to run. "Should" is key though, all too often someone doesn't do right by their clients.

[TZubiri]

>Most often the business hires a security contractor to take care of it, and signs the contract without understanding the terms.

The bulk of the responsibility here would lie on whoever signed I think. It's one thing to click "I agree" when you are making a SaaS account for downloading cat videos. But at a job, you are getting paid to read these things and to make informed decisions.

[cogman10]

> Or are you just saying the person placing the cameras is decoupled from the person making the decision to aggregate them all.

That's exactly what's happening.

People are buying webcams which are cheap and have in their ToS something to the effect of "we get to sell everything the camera can see". Which, in turn, allows them to partner with Flock and sell video footage directly to them.

Consider the fact that at one point, Amazon partnered with Flock to sell their ring camera footage to Flock. [1] It only got botched because of the creepy superbowl commercial selling the spying as "finding lost puppies".

[1] https://apnews.com/article/amazon-flock-super-bowl-surveilla...