Airbnb Has a Hidden-Camera Problem (2019)(theatlantic.com)
theatlantic.com
Airbnb Has a Hidden-Camera Problem (2019)
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/03/what-happens-when-you-find-cameras-your-airbnb/585007/
60 comments
The camera stuff is beyond creepy. But the name discrepancy seems like it's getting blown out of proportion. Ray is a common nickname for Ralph...
While I wouldn’t like to find a hidden camera, if I did I would not steal them AND steal the keys to the house. I do wonder if you’re renting without the host present if you should just block the camera view and keep staying
If you know about Gerald Foos https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Foos this shouldn’t be a surprise - here’s the New Yorker article https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/04/11/gay-talese-the...
And none of these people were prosecuted? Wow. I think voyeurism might just be the least taken-serious crime today.
See also https://www.cbsnews.com/news/making-video-voyeurism-a-crime/ which was absolutely infuriating to find out about.
AirBnB should just offer a hidden camera/microphone sweep service.
Not needed. I just don't use AirBnB anymore.
I suspect the problem isn't with the cameras, but with landlords they can't control - and that interfere with AirBnb's bottom line.
I suspect the problem isn't with the cameras, but with landlords they can't control - and that interfere with AirBnb's bottom line.
Why would only airbnb be affected with this hidden camera problem?
Because they make enough money not to care and Congress also makes enough money not to care.
It's definitely not just a problem at AirBnB's. It's also a problem at Korean love hotels for example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggYIsnUgUdU&feature=youtu.be
AirBnB's are more affected though, as the penalty might just be a warning/fine/bad review affecting a single property. At a hotel, the entire hotel of X rooms would be affected by the bad publicity, so they have more at stake.
AirBnB's are more affected though, as the penalty might just be a warning/fine/bad review affecting a single property. At a hotel, the entire hotel of X rooms would be affected by the bad publicity, so they have more at stake.
Could Airbnb solve this by implementing large fines for hosts where hidden cameras are found?
There's also the issue of a guest setting up a hidden camera in their rented airbnb without the hosts knowledge. I doubt most hosts are sophisticated enough to even do simple things like see what devices are connected to their wifi networks or cycle wifi passwords on a per-guest basis.
[deleted]
Ironically you'd need hidden cameras to catch guests that place hidden cameras in rentals.
[deleted]
The state should solve this is by making it a felony. And make Airbnb civilly liable.
There is a whole industry that has been set up around cleaning and servicing Airbnb rooms. With financial incentives, I don’t see why these services couldn’t be co-opted to also screen for cameras, as part of their regular cleaning. This is just another component of client safety. Would this eliminate the problem? No. But it sure as hell would help.
Making hosts civilly liability for these hidden cameras, unless they can demonstrate they’ve taken proper steps to ensure safety, would motivate this change. Of course hosts will won’t like it, but it’s not as if these people are going to stop renting out their rooms; it’s too financially lucrative.
Making hosts civilly liability for these hidden cameras, unless they can demonstrate they’ve taken proper steps to ensure safety, would motivate this change. Of course hosts will won’t like it, but it’s not as if these people are going to stop renting out their rooms; it’s too financially lucrative.
Okay HN nerds: what’s the best way to go about sniffing out these hidden cams?
[deleted]
Your eyes and a bright flashlight? Any hidden camera will need a translucent window with a lens behind it, and they're not that hard to spot once you know what you're looking for.
don’t stay in an Airbnb
This.
If you want to shower in a place, but have to find the hidden cameras prior to taking your shower? I think that's a pretty good sign that you probably shouldn't be showering in that place.
If you want to shower in a place, but have to find the hidden cameras prior to taking your shower? I think that's a pretty good sign that you probably shouldn't be showering in that place.
If you think hotels are immune you’re wrong. Any room can have hidden cameras.
That may be true [1], but for a hotel operator the risk is really high and the reward really low: if someone finds a camera in your hotel room you risk losing your license, your investment (hotels aren't cheap), and you risk the city wanting to make an example out of you. You also need the rest of the hotel personnel not to notice. It's really not worth it.
An unlicensed operator running an operation alone from their literal living room doesn't have as much to lose. They might also not think ahead as much, since there is a lot less friction from idea to your first guest.
[1] I don't have stats in hidden cameras in hotels, though, but I would bet that hidden cameras are possible but not likely. At least for "decent" ones.
An unlicensed operator running an operation alone from their literal living room doesn't have as much to lose. They might also not think ahead as much, since there is a lot less friction from idea to your first guest.
[1] I don't have stats in hidden cameras in hotels, though, but I would bet that hidden cameras are possible but not likely. At least for "decent" ones.
There was a recent BBC video[1] where Stacey Dooley visited South Korea and engaged with police experts there who search for hidden cameras as part of a huge 'peeping-tom'-type problem they have with surveillance (primarily of women) for the purpose of pornography. I concluded from that video that I couldn't really on my technical expertise and a thorough physical search to find a hidden camera. Unless I had something that could detect GSM radios or something of the sort.
[1]: https://youtu.be/ggYIsnUgUdU
[1]: https://youtu.be/ggYIsnUgUdU
You could probably use an SDR to find transmitting wireless devices.
Well the ones that stream live should be detectable by either sniffing wifi traffic or tracing the Ethernet cables. If they're not battery powered they should also be plugged in the mains somewhere, but not sure how you'd find them easily.
If they're battery powered and record to internal memory then you'd probably need to spot them directly.
If they're battery powered and record to internal memory then you'd probably need to spot them directly.
Non-Linear Junction Detector.
https://hackaday.com/2017/09/20/spy-tech-nonlinear-junction-...
the math/physics behind how this works is fascinating, however, NLJDs are expensive, slow and require specialized electronics skills that the average person doesnt have. NLJD is what Military/Intelligence use to sweep a room for bugs.
but at end of the day, it's an arms race where the only way to win is not to play. if it became easy to detect circuits hidden in the walls or in household objects, they can just escalate to tactics like when the KGB used special screws in the beams of the US embassy in Moscow to record ambient audio of the keys pressed on teletypes to recover the messages. then there's the viral video from a few year back demonstrating recovering audio inside a room with a camera aimed through a glass window pane at a foil bag of chips. the same techniques that recover audio also work for video. it's just a signal to reconstruct.
https://hackaday.com/2017/09/20/spy-tech-nonlinear-junction-...
the math/physics behind how this works is fascinating, however, NLJDs are expensive, slow and require specialized electronics skills that the average person doesnt have. NLJD is what Military/Intelligence use to sweep a room for bugs.
but at end of the day, it's an arms race where the only way to win is not to play. if it became easy to detect circuits hidden in the walls or in household objects, they can just escalate to tactics like when the KGB used special screws in the beams of the US embassy in Moscow to record ambient audio of the keys pressed on teletypes to recover the messages. then there's the viral video from a few year back demonstrating recovering audio inside a room with a camera aimed through a glass window pane at a foil bag of chips. the same techniques that recover audio also work for video. it's just a signal to reconstruct.
Why would you not do this? It decreases risk, and customers mostly care about price. As technology gets better, this is inevitable.
Because it’s a massive invasion of privacy and customers hate it?
Yes, they’re price sensitive, but if Airbnb carried a “you will be recorded while you sleep” disclaimer I doubt many would agree.
Yes, they’re price sensitive, but if Airbnb carried a “you will be recorded while you sleep” disclaimer I doubt many would agree.
Well, that's what terms of service are for. Facebook doesn't seem to have this problem.
Many tenants have problems with adverse selection; more robust monitoring systems would allow for them to take on more risky tenants, without seeing their property trashed.
Many tenants have problems with adverse selection; more robust monitoring systems would allow for them to take on more risky tenants, without seeing their property trashed.
Cameras pointed at the bed? Sounds like voyeurism not security
My colleagues and I recently published a paper at CHI 2020 that was inspired in large part by this problem of hidden cameras in AirBnBs. Here is a link to ACM Digital Library (https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3313831.3376585) and a PDF copy of the paper on my Box account (https://cmu.box.com/s/89iugeaf3hcc51ir9f4akrp1a9b0mogd).
One of the things we did was a survey of N=226 AirBnB users. 86 people said that they manually searched for devices in AirBnBs, and 8 actually found undisclosed devices. As you might imagine, manually searching is hard because devices are small, but also because you don't always know if you've found everything, and because it looks socially awkward too.
People also reported on how they looked for devices, ranging from manual search (most common) to using WiFi / Bluetooth scanning tools. Here is an excerpt from our paper as to what people said they did.
11 (13%) tech-savvy participants used special tools to help search, such as using a phone camera or flashlight, scanning Bluetooth and the Wi-Fi network, and using an infrared scanner. For example, participants reported that they turned off all the lights and used their smartphone flashlight to shine around the area and look for reflections that might indicate a camera lens. Some participants reported that their smartphone cameras did not have an infrared filter, and so they could detect invisible infrared light emitted by cameras. Other participants reported using smartphone apps, such as Fing and iNet, to detect suspicious devices connecting to the network. Two participants brought RF signal detectors to scan the room for the source of RF signals (cameras). However, these methods require a strong technical background, and the devices might not be cheap (e.g., over $100 USD on Amazon for a popular RF signal detector).
The main point of the paper, though, is to look at ways for IoT device manufacturers to help physically locate devices. We called these IoT Locators. An example might be to have devices blink or beep. It's trying to address the physical layer of privacy, to help people have more awareness of what's nearby and where these devices are. The logical layer might tell you that there's a camera nearby, but we also wanted to help people find those devices and see (for example) where those cameras might be pointed. There's a big difference between a camera in an AirBnb that is pointed toward the living room versus pointed out the window, something that isn't captured just by knowing that a camera is nearby.
There's lots of limitations, for example needing lots of standards among device manufacturers and how to incentivize them to install things like these in devices. I would say the main idea, though, is that we need to really think more about the physical dimensions of privacy (which has been underlooked in research and industry), and that we need to think more about how to help hotels, AirBnBs, and device manufacturers that do want to do better on privacy w.r.t devices, but don't know what to do.
One of the things we did was a survey of N=226 AirBnB users. 86 people said that they manually searched for devices in AirBnBs, and 8 actually found undisclosed devices. As you might imagine, manually searching is hard because devices are small, but also because you don't always know if you've found everything, and because it looks socially awkward too.
People also reported on how they looked for devices, ranging from manual search (most common) to using WiFi / Bluetooth scanning tools. Here is an excerpt from our paper as to what people said they did.
11 (13%) tech-savvy participants used special tools to help search, such as using a phone camera or flashlight, scanning Bluetooth and the Wi-Fi network, and using an infrared scanner. For example, participants reported that they turned off all the lights and used their smartphone flashlight to shine around the area and look for reflections that might indicate a camera lens. Some participants reported that their smartphone cameras did not have an infrared filter, and so they could detect invisible infrared light emitted by cameras. Other participants reported using smartphone apps, such as Fing and iNet, to detect suspicious devices connecting to the network. Two participants brought RF signal detectors to scan the room for the source of RF signals (cameras). However, these methods require a strong technical background, and the devices might not be cheap (e.g., over $100 USD on Amazon for a popular RF signal detector).
The main point of the paper, though, is to look at ways for IoT device manufacturers to help physically locate devices. We called these IoT Locators. An example might be to have devices blink or beep. It's trying to address the physical layer of privacy, to help people have more awareness of what's nearby and where these devices are. The logical layer might tell you that there's a camera nearby, but we also wanted to help people find those devices and see (for example) where those cameras might be pointed. There's a big difference between a camera in an AirBnb that is pointed toward the living room versus pointed out the window, something that isn't captured just by knowing that a camera is nearby.
There's lots of limitations, for example needing lots of standards among device manufacturers and how to incentivize them to install things like these in devices. I would say the main idea, though, is that we need to really think more about the physical dimensions of privacy (which has been underlooked in research and industry), and that we need to think more about how to help hotels, AirBnBs, and device manufacturers that do want to do better on privacy w.r.t devices, but don't know what to do.
Very interesting but one caveat: I doubt you would ever get the most relevant producers on board. There are dedicated spycam manufacturers and all the cheap China stuff to build into other things is probably what ends up being used to spy on customers. So little benefit to try and get legal or voluntary commitments if in the end many won't play along.
This is what happen in Japan. In Japan phones' camera must ring shutter sound on taking photo that's annoying on many situations meanwhile bad people use dedicated spycam that's silent of course.
Disclaimer: I work on IoT and build things with little speakers and Blinky lights on them.
Solution: Curtains. As in, room-filling curtains, so people can do private things in an Air-b'n-box.
Solution: Curtains. As in, room-filling curtains, so people can do private things in an Air-b'n-box.
The bigger problem is the VC scum behind the company which as per the typical VC playbook does not care about the negative externalities caused by their creation and will only do the minimum they can get away with.
> In January, Bigham discovered cameras in his rental that he says were never disclosed. After he reached out to the Trust & Safety team, representatives told him he and his family had in fact consented to the cameras because they were visibly displayed in photos on the listing. After Bigham’s blog post on the ordeal went viral, Airbnb apologized and refunded his money.
This kind of behavior is often explained by excuses like incompetence, human error or poor training. There are 2 possible outcomes:
1) It's an obvious lie and tells you everything you need to know about the company, but somehow people keep swallowing it instead of calling BS.
2) It's the true reason but highlights the fact that serious incidents like these are delegated to people with insufficient training because the company doesn't consider the problem serious enough to invest in proper training.
Either option doesn't look good. This is not limited to Airbnb by the way; here are some past examples from other VC-funded companies:
Kitsplit's mis-sold insurance doesn't actually protect against stolen gear, fobs the person off but then does the obvious damage control and pretends to care when the story blew up (no fucks given about the impact on the people until their own reputation becomes at risk): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20276631
Wag "dog walking as a service" startup that tries to silence a killed dog's owners with an NDA, again no concerns for the wellbeing of the owners, only concern about their own reputation: https://www.facebook.com/nick.moore.7140/posts/3600186133211
Wag again, realizing that their entire business model is broken, introduces predatory fees to stay afloat that might not even be enforceable in court: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20854100
I could find many more examples (even from companies I unfortunately worked for in the past - because yes, as a lot of people here I used to be drinking the startup koolaid and was part of the problem too) but I think it's enough to show a clear pattern here - these companies could not care less about the negative externalities of their business or actions on society at large.
> In January, Bigham discovered cameras in his rental that he says were never disclosed. After he reached out to the Trust & Safety team, representatives told him he and his family had in fact consented to the cameras because they were visibly displayed in photos on the listing. After Bigham’s blog post on the ordeal went viral, Airbnb apologized and refunded his money.
This kind of behavior is often explained by excuses like incompetence, human error or poor training. There are 2 possible outcomes:
1) It's an obvious lie and tells you everything you need to know about the company, but somehow people keep swallowing it instead of calling BS.
2) It's the true reason but highlights the fact that serious incidents like these are delegated to people with insufficient training because the company doesn't consider the problem serious enough to invest in proper training.
Either option doesn't look good. This is not limited to Airbnb by the way; here are some past examples from other VC-funded companies:
Kitsplit's mis-sold insurance doesn't actually protect against stolen gear, fobs the person off but then does the obvious damage control and pretends to care when the story blew up (no fucks given about the impact on the people until their own reputation becomes at risk): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20276631
Wag "dog walking as a service" startup that tries to silence a killed dog's owners with an NDA, again no concerns for the wellbeing of the owners, only concern about their own reputation: https://www.facebook.com/nick.moore.7140/posts/3600186133211
Wag again, realizing that their entire business model is broken, introduces predatory fees to stay afloat that might not even be enforceable in court: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20854100
I could find many more examples (even from companies I unfortunately worked for in the past - because yes, as a lot of people here I used to be drinking the startup koolaid and was part of the problem too) but I think it's enough to show a clear pattern here - these companies could not care less about the negative externalities of their business or actions on society at large.
Why are the VCs to blame and not the founders and executives of AirBnB?
They’re all blameworthy, but the VCs are the ones with the power to stop this sort of nonsense.
Stop investing in nakedly criminal schemes.
Stop investing in nakedly criminal schemes.
I would actually argue the blame goes to governments for not enforcing their laws. There will always be scummy founders who create criminal enterprises and scummy VCs who invest in them - but governments need to make sure they aren't financially rewarded for it.
I agree with this to an extent, but expecting everyone to be committing crimes until caught would put an insane strain on the justice system and would basically collapse society. A lot of our society is still built on trust and works only because the majority of people aren't malicious. This used to work fine until VC and the whole "startup" mentality made breaking laws a routine and respectable thing.
Or the employees...
No one is forcing these people to work for and enable this toxic company.
No one is forcing these people to work for and enable this toxic company.
In a lot of cases VC is the exact reason why the company has negative externalities. Without VC, something like Airbnb could actually operate on a smaller scale and longer timeframe, making sure to do things properly with regards to laws, consumer protections and better trust & safety. VC encourages the "move fast and break things" and "growth at all costs" mentality and so the current Airbnb is the result.
Having worked in megacorporations my entire career, I have seen more than just VC push for "moving fast and breaking things" with little regard to trust and safety.
If you are an engineering manager who is telling your product management and sales folks that you're going to miss the end-of-year contract bonanza because you're going to take the time necessary to get metrics and monitoring, tests, and validation in place to meet an acceptable quality bar, gods help you. You'll be dinged hard for "missing critical deadlines" and promptly replaced with someone who will abuse the team's work/life balance and screw over customers.
But then the new manager will be blamed for burned-out engineers leaving the team and customers raging because of the abuse the company heaps on them.
It's a ruthless cyclical no-win situation that speaks to the need for organized labor in tech.
If you are an engineering manager who is telling your product management and sales folks that you're going to miss the end-of-year contract bonanza because you're going to take the time necessary to get metrics and monitoring, tests, and validation in place to meet an acceptable quality bar, gods help you. You'll be dinged hard for "missing critical deadlines" and promptly replaced with someone who will abuse the team's work/life balance and screw over customers.
But then the new manager will be blamed for burned-out engineers leaving the team and customers raging because of the abuse the company heaps on them.
It's a ruthless cyclical no-win situation that speaks to the need for organized labor in tech.
AirBNB only makes money by encouraging people to break the law and providing a market place for their illegal services
Literally everything the service does is a negative externality
Literally everything the service does is a negative externality
Airbnb should just be upfront and tell customers they need to assume they are being filmed at all times. There are cameras now the size of a grain of rice, this issue will never go away, the cat is out of the bag.
Maybe this is not bad advice. Kinda like "don't post any pictures on the internet that you wouldn't want your grandma to see" or "assume your employer is reading all your e-mails". But still, it is a massive invasion of privacy and there should be some recourse for the victims/punishment for the perpetrators.
'Assume any current/future employer will be reviewing what you do at your AirBNB. Enjoy your stay.'
My favorite part is when the dude who was staying in an illegal flophouse calls the police about cameras
Gee I wonder why the police response was not kind to him
Gee I wonder why the police response was not kind to him
How costly are these cameras? What are their battery life? Do they stream or record locally? Where do people get them?
(I'm obviously not interested in unethical spying, but could be fun to play with)
(I'm obviously not interested in unethical spying, but could be fun to play with)
You can get a camera from Wyze for less than 40 bucks that records in hd, does well in darkness, can be remotely monitored and controlled, records sound, and has a speaker (for talking to my cat). You can set it to trigger recording on movement. I have an sd card in it, and it records about two weeks of events at a time. Records to cloud and/or local storage.
Just be aware that security is never guaranteed and they’ve had some issues in the past.
Just be aware that security is never guaranteed and they’ve had some issues in the past.
The state should be regularly auditing hotels and room-shares, checking for fire safety, cleanliness, hidden cameras, and legality of the business.
Businesses don't systematically change in response to a few customer complaints (they just sloppily deal with them), but they do respond to large fines and legal action.
Businesses don't systematically change in response to a few customer complaints (they just sloppily deal with them), but they do respond to large fines and legal action.
But how would the state regulate this when subletting via Airbnb is already violating the regulations in place?
At least in Oregon where I live, airbnb is legal if you have a business license and maybe a permit depending in your city. The subletting issue is a civil issue that the landlord would have to sue over.
I’m not sure I agree with that. Yelp, for example has sunk countless businesses with poor food and customer service on the basis of customer complaints, and at the same time empowered others to grow. On the room share front, I can’t even count the number of regulated hotels I’ve been at that were completely unsanitary and unsafe.
I think that would work with airbnb's rating system as well if the hidden cameras weren't hidden.