Hidden Cameras in AirBnBs(twitter.com)
twitter.com
Hidden Cameras in AirBnBs
https://twitter.com/textfiles/status/935305053258125312
119 コメント
Additionally it is in fact expressly illegal in 13 US states (Alabama, Arkansas, California, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, South Dakota and Utah) to use video or audio equipment in a private areas without express permission of the observed.
And other restrictions apply in other states: https://www.rcfp.org/first-amendment-handbook/introduction-r...
And other restrictions apply in other states: https://www.rcfp.org/first-amendment-handbook/introduction-r...
In Sweden it's also a crime to secretly film someone in a private area (the whole home counts, and even garden and balcony). It doesn't matter who is being recorded or who put up the camera. The maximum penalty is two years imprisonment.
so if you live alone, monitor your own house and a thief come for "a visit" you can get sued and imprisoned?
No, I doubt that. For someone to be convicted for this, criminal intent must be proven. If someone lives alone - and informs any guests that they have a camera inside - it should be hard for the burglar to claim that the home owner intended to secretly film them.
On the other hand, the purpose of installing a camera in the first place would be fairly good proof of intent to secretly film intruders. That's somewhat the entire point of security cameras.
It seems that if you put a hidden wildlife camera in a swedish forest to make nature photos, you can be sued (if I'm not wrong). The "this is my garden" part should be taken seriously.
Not true. Anyone is allowed to take photographs and film in public spaces which should definitely include forests. Though this does not apply to installing permanent cameras in public spaces, which is much more restricted.
The main purpose of a wildlife camera-trap is to be set and left in the wild for days, weeks or months. In this sense can be called permanent. The best models are relatively expensive and can be stolen if you don't hide it carefully. Those camera are also used for fighting against environmental crimes (i.e: exposing arsonists walking the forest at 4AM minutes before a fireforest starts), so can be vandalized.
Ah, I didn't know that, thanks. In those cases you're probably correct that it's illegal to put up such camera without obtaining a permission. Though I don't think it's the law about "Kränkande Fotografering" (roughly translates to "Offensive Photography") - which is the law that makes it illegal to put up secret cameras in a home - that you'd be violating, but rather some other law that regulates surveillance cameras.
Even if it's technically not allowed, AirBnB is not proactively enforcing the ToS by checking the properties prior to rental. Without a legal framework for prosecution, the most we can realistically expect is a refund to the consumer and banishment of the property owner.
Does it matter? I don't expect someone from corporate to be regularly sweeping my Motel 6 room for hidden cameras. That doesn't mean I don't have an expectation of privacy or that Motel 6 has no responsibility to protect that expectation. If there's no legal recourse where I'm staying, I'd expect to be reasonably compensated for any trouble, which it sounds like is happening.
You actually do. An employee of Motel 6 (the housekeeper) sweeps your Motel 6 room every single day, or at least between stays. Furthermore the onsite management is explicitly expected to enforce corporate regulations. Yet no ABNB employee comes anywhere near your 'rental', and there exists framework for enforcing ABNB policy beyond the good-will of the 'hosts'.
If the motel housekeeping or management is the one planting the camera, then I don't see how this is any different than case with Airbnb. Airbnb hosts are explicitly expected to follow the terms of service, just as hotel management is expected to follow corporate policy.
Plus, the whole point of a hidden camera is that it's hidden. If anything, it would be far harder to find a hidden camera as the number of rooms to search increases.
Plus, the whole point of a hidden camera is that it's hidden. If anything, it would be far harder to find a hidden camera as the number of rooms to search increases.
If the motel housekeeping or management is the one planting the camera, then the corporation will be held account. On the other hand, if a host plants the camera, AirBNB's language makes it clear that there is no accountability or responsibility on AirBNB's part. So the incentives to actually enforce that policy are entirely different.
A case could be made against the property owner for fraud. They said they complied with AirBnB rules, and they sold you something based on that statement, but they were not in compliance. Sounds like fraud to me.
How would you imagine that would work? AirBnB employs stealth spying experts that come and sweep the property for cameras?
While I'm guessing you're being sarcastic, a number of corporate head offices use 'secret shoppers' or other similar techniques for ensuring their retail locations are following corporate policy.
Also - remember - while it may be 'your own house' - once you engage in commerce (renting out 'your own house') the rules change for you. Once people start paying - you begin to incur new responsibilities
As I work in hardware / cameras and I've done online sourcing of chinese goods, my email has been collectively added to more and more companies' mailing lists. I get spam for spy cameras all the time. Tissue boxes are popular, clocks, clock radios:
Talitor seems to have plenty of various types of hidden cameras: http://www.talitor.com/
http://www.talitor.com/products/DVR/CH0721w/page_CH0721w.htm
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Wireless-Table-Clock-Camera-...
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Table-Clock-Camera-Alarm-Set...
Talitor seems to have plenty of various types of hidden cameras: http://www.talitor.com/
http://www.talitor.com/products/DVR/CH0721w/page_CH0721w.htm
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Wireless-Table-Clock-Camera-...
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Table-Clock-Camera-Alarm-Set...
Hidden cameras are a regular staple of Japanese crime news. They hide cameras in literally anything. Inside smoke detectors and back-of-stall-door coathangers are two of the more nefarious ones I've seen.
The alarm clocks on Aliexpress are super easy to tell it's a camera
Operators of unregulated flophouses engage in shady, unethical practices? Color me shocked.
unregulated
They're not unregulated everywhere, you know. Short-term house rentals were not exactly invented yesterday.
They're not unregulated everywhere, you know. Short-term house rentals were not exactly invented yesterday.
Devil's advocate:
The use of cameras can help prosecute and provide proof to back up destruction claims - something airbnb providers probably run up against regularly.
And given the legal grey area airbnb hosts exist in, it's probably not explicitly illegal, since they're filming their own property.
Non-devil's advocate:
Creepy as hell. Especially since there's only a camera in the bedroom.
The use of cameras can help prosecute and provide proof to back up destruction claims - something airbnb providers probably run up against regularly.
And given the legal grey area airbnb hosts exist in, it's probably not explicitly illegal, since they're filming their own property.
Non-devil's advocate:
Creepy as hell. Especially since there's only a camera in the bedroom.
Having a doorbell camera at the home entrance is one thing -- allows you to verify that your house is being occupied by the number of people specified on the contract, which is especially relevant when there's home damage. But putting a camera in the bedroom is clearly out of bounds, there's no valid "devil's advocate" stance for this one, c'mon.
> they're filming their own property
What? No. Guests have reasonable expectation of privacy, same as hotels.
What? No. Guests have reasonable expectation of privacy, same as hotels.
AirBnB is explicitly hiding in a gray area. The same hotel protections do not necessarily extend to having a friend over at your house (which is closer to the legal interpretation AirBnB prefers) You are legally permitted to put up cameras in your own house, and it's a common practice to set up "nanny cams" when leaving the house to a babysitter
I'm pretty sure secretly filming your guest's bedroom is also covered by existing laws, even without the rental.
There is also possibility the existing laws take into account intent. Filming with a nanny cam that is visible (even if you don't call it out) to protect your kid is allowed. Filming with a hidden cam for prurient reasons is illegal. Proving intent would be case by case and up to a prosecutor/court.
Airbnb is not explicitly hiding in a gray area. Airbnb TOS forbids the use of undisclosed cameras and those in private areas.
It’s like at a hotel that prohibits smoking but people smoke in the rooms anyway. The hotel doesn’t “hide in a gray area,” they have a rule and it isn’t always followed.
It’s like at a hotel that prohibits smoking but people smoke in the rooms anyway. The hotel doesn’t “hide in a gray area,” they have a rule and it isn’t always followed.
So basically more or less allowed, but you're being a dick for doing it.
There might be laws against it actually, since the other person does not explicitly consent to being filmed, and it's not a public space.
There might be laws against it actually, since the other person does not explicitly consent to being filmed, and it's not a public space.
[deleted]
But you can’t put your nanny cams in the rest room.
> What? No. Guests have reasonable expectation of privacy, same as hotels.
What set of laws guarantee that? This is a consequence of living outside the laws meant for hotels. AirBnBs are not hotel rooms.
What set of laws guarantee that? This is a consequence of living outside the laws meant for hotels. AirBnBs are not hotel rooms.
Lots of jurisdictions have privacy laws.
For a home, they are based on whether there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. People have a reasonable expectation of privacy in pretty much any bedroom intended for their use.
For a home, they are based on whether there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. People have a reasonable expectation of privacy in pretty much any bedroom intended for their use.
I would love to see some references to privacy laws that fit the situation. I think most of them come in the form of apartment landlord -> occupant, not occupant -> occupant. I think people really need to look carefully at what these laws actually say because I doubt any of the hotel laws and most of the renter laws actually apply.
It's not a stretch that the bedroom and bathroom of a rental would fall under this law, for example:
http://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-21-15.html
The definition isn't about the rental arrangement, just the use of the room.
http://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-21-15.html
The definition isn't about the rental arrangement, just the use of the room.
I don't know if I would rely on this one. Its about changing rooms (with a very specific definition) and bath rooms. A camera in the living room would probably not trigger the law. You might be there with the bedroom, but I wonder if that law would be triggered by a private security system for the home owner.
I'm pretty sure privacy laws would apply to a simply invited guest; "you can change in there". I wouldn't be surprised if they applied to illicit recordings of a spouse...
People enjoy strong rights in their own homes, they don't trump every right someone else may have.
People enjoy strong rights in their own homes, they don't trump every right someone else may have.
but it's not an "occupant->occupant" relationship when one occupant is paying the other (aka "the owner"), with whom they have had no meaningful prior relationship, for the privilege of staying in this place for a day or two. That is by definition a stranger, and a landlord.
It would be, but AirBnB's legality and where it fits in are constantly under dispute. If the jurisdiction has short term rental laws that fit, then yes its landlord -> occupant, but many places that rent AirBnB are not legally allowed in the first place. The law is different than common sense.
> And given the legal grey area airbnb hosts exist in, it's probably not explicitly illegal, since they're filming their own property.
Depends. In some countries security cameras indoors are not legal - that is, if you get caught putting a burglar on camera, s/he can sue you for invasion of privacy. There's also laws that make it required for you to clearly indicate there are security cameras present.
Depends. In some countries security cameras indoors are not legal - that is, if you get caught putting a burglar on camera, s/he can sue you for invasion of privacy. There's also laws that make it required for you to clearly indicate there are security cameras present.
> In some countries security cameras indoors are not legal - that is, if you get caught putting a burglar on camera, s/he can sue you for invasion of privacy.
What country is that? That sounds backward as hell.
What country is that? That sounds backward as hell.
Such laws normally do not cover persons inside illegally. Even if a lay reading of the law does seem to allow such an argument, no reasonably judge would allow it.
Cameras that are disclosed are very different than hidden cameras in bedrooms.
Like a dashcam for your home, maybe insurance companies would even lower your rates if you have them.
I can't legally put a camera in my bathroom and secretly record guests doing their business.
Not a problem if they are disclosed as per the terms of service. The issue is they are secret and the guest is not aware of their presence.
Yes, or like any other issue, my position on this is always depends whether I'm the renter or I'm the landlord.
You have to disclose to your guests.
Here is another report on Twitter about a similar case, it seems like it didn't get the required attention at the time:
https://twitter.com/goodyerin/status/859119557654523906
https://twitter.com/goodyerin/status/859119557654523906
This should be a criminal offence with jail time; not a refund.
This is a criminal offence in the UK, providing intent can be proven. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/67
[deleted]
"I'm sorry judge, I really didn't know! How could have I known that my cheap motion detector sold from China had an embedded spy cam?! When I was installing it, I just wanted to plug in all the cables and the internet plug was the only one that fit, computers are meant to be user-friendly like this..."
Are UK judges that credulous?
UK judges are generally very reasonable in my experience (though I should acknowledge that my experience is limited to being an observer or witness in a small number of cases).
If something really does seem like an honest mistake, they may take that into account when passing a sentence.
On the other hand, if someone not only did something bad but then the judge thinks they tried to cover it up even in court, that is likely to count against them, possibly heavily.
If something really does seem like an honest mistake, they may take that into account when passing a sentence.
On the other hand, if someone not only did something bad but then the judge thinks they tried to cover it up even in court, that is likely to count against them, possibly heavily.
Right, the other poster's story is along the same lines as someone claiming that they like to shadowbox in the street when they get drunk.
In most cases it doesn't matter what the judge believes about you, what matters is what the prosecutor can prove to a jury, and whether the defence can introduce that vital "shadow of a doubt". Can one of a dozen average citizens believe this story ?
For minor things a panel of magistrates (non-lawyers who volunteered for this job, a clerk helps them understand what the law means and they can "punt" tricky things to a judge if they have to) decides, rather than a jury under supervision of a judge. Magistrates only handle little things, shop lifting, ordinary burglary, punch up in a night club with a few bruises, that sort of thing. No murders, armed robberies, rapes. But I don't know if "spy camera voyeurism" is something that'd go to a magistrate's court.
If the only thing the prosecution has is this - you owned this device, and somebody found it, you say you didn't know what it does - there's actually a good chance they would never take it before a court. Crown Prosecutors are specifically told only to prosecute people who they're sure they can prove are guilty - none of this throw everything at them and hope it sticks nonsense, "Innocent" verdicts are actually rare in this system, not because hardly anybody is innocent but because prosecutors are supposed to be bringing slam-dunk cases. I actually attend court periodically, and as an outsider, not a member of a jury, I'd say I never saw one person in the dock who didn't do it.
Anyway most of the time the police are going to find other stuff, which the prosecution can use to make a more solid case. That might be really definitive, like a test video you recorded, or a forum post you made saying you are "going to try it for real soon" on a spy camera voyeur site. Or it might be circumstantial but still able to be shown to a jury, like your search history "Spy cam bedroom sex" "Secret recordings" "Voyeur tiny camera", or they found the box the device came in, and it says "Spy camera: Most excellent definiton for make video" in big letters.
For minor things a panel of magistrates (non-lawyers who volunteered for this job, a clerk helps them understand what the law means and they can "punt" tricky things to a judge if they have to) decides, rather than a jury under supervision of a judge. Magistrates only handle little things, shop lifting, ordinary burglary, punch up in a night club with a few bruises, that sort of thing. No murders, armed robberies, rapes. But I don't know if "spy camera voyeurism" is something that'd go to a magistrate's court.
If the only thing the prosecution has is this - you owned this device, and somebody found it, you say you didn't know what it does - there's actually a good chance they would never take it before a court. Crown Prosecutors are specifically told only to prosecute people who they're sure they can prove are guilty - none of this throw everything at them and hope it sticks nonsense, "Innocent" verdicts are actually rare in this system, not because hardly anybody is innocent but because prosecutors are supposed to be bringing slam-dunk cases. I actually attend court periodically, and as an outsider, not a member of a jury, I'd say I never saw one person in the dock who didn't do it.
Anyway most of the time the police are going to find other stuff, which the prosecution can use to make a more solid case. That might be really definitive, like a test video you recorded, or a forum post you made saying you are "going to try it for real soon" on a spy camera voyeur site. Or it might be circumstantial but still able to be shown to a jury, like your search history "Spy cam bedroom sex" "Secret recordings" "Voyeur tiny camera", or they found the box the device came in, and it says "Spy camera: Most excellent definiton for make video" in big letters.
Could be a felony or misdemeanor depending on where it took place.
https://www.rcfp.org/first-amendment-handbook/introduction-r...
https://www.rcfp.org/first-amendment-handbook/introduction-r...
Exactly, and this is the advice AirBnB should also give to the renter; I like that they already offered a refund and got rid of the property on their site, that's about as much as they can do within their jurisdiction, but it's up to the people discovering it to pursue it legally.
That'd be an easy way to send an Airbnb owner to jail. Rent their home, place a hidden camera, and report the camera you placed.
In Germany it is illegal to own or sell hidden cameras.
How are "hidden" cameras defined?
There's a lot of devices including smartphones that have tiny, almost invisible-to-the-naked-eye pin-hole cameras. Do those count? If I want to have a hidden cam to watch my birdfeeder, is that illegal?
There's a lot of devices including smartphones that have tiny, almost invisible-to-the-naked-eye pin-hole cameras. Do those count? If I want to have a hidden cam to watch my birdfeeder, is that illegal?
If you can read German: https://dejure.org/gesetze/TKG/90.html
Basically, cameras that appear to be everyday objects and are particularly suited for recording non-public locations without those being recorded being aware of the fact.
IANAL, but because Smartphones are expected to have some recording device they may be okay, a hidden camera to watch your bird feeder seems more of a grey area because it can also be used to record humans.
Basically, cameras that appear to be everyday objects and are particularly suited for recording non-public locations without those being recorded being aware of the fact.
IANAL, but because Smartphones are expected to have some recording device they may be okay, a hidden camera to watch your bird feeder seems more of a grey area because it can also be used to record humans.
[deleted]
As the reply in the thread below the main tweet mentions, similar problems exist in hotels as well. Probably there is a market for making a simple and affordable "bug detector" which we can carry?
Has this happened in hotels? If they're hotel chains, it'd cause some pretty serious reputation damage.
That's a thing: http://www.dx.com/s/bug+detector?cateId=0&cateName=All%20Cat...
(Not a recommendation - haven't tried any of these)
(Not a recommendation - haven't tried any of these)
Would any of those have found this (non-wireless) camera?
If it's active IR then it's pretty easy to find using a detector. If it's a passive optical device with a wired connection, then you can't find it with a detector that wouldn't also find a ton of other signal cables.
It's then probably easier to find a camera by looking in the network rather than physically. The problem with that is you can only find it when it's transmitting and not if it's sleeping (unless it happens to also have a public endpoint that's always open).
It's then probably easier to find a camera by looking in the network rather than physically. The problem with that is you can only find it when it's transmitting and not if it's sleeping (unless it happens to also have a public endpoint that's always open).
Key detail:
> He left at 3am, reported, host is suspended, colleague got refund.
Airbnb can't check everything, but at least they respond in a good and timely manner.
> He left at 3am, reported, host is suspended, colleague got refund.
Airbnb can't check everything, but at least they respond in a good and timely manner.
I once ended up in an AirBnB that had large cockroaches that came out at night (and landed on the bed, freaking my wife out). Called AirBnB at 2AM, they asked for proof (sent them a video). Finally, at 5AM I told them that we were leaving.
They just cancelled the reservation, giving us no chance to leave a review. AFAIK, that host is still renting out her cockroach-riddled place in Oahu.
They just cancelled the reservation, giving us no chance to leave a review. AFAIK, that host is still renting out her cockroach-riddled place in Oahu.
I've lived in Hawaii. Unfortunately, there is not a lot you can do about the cockroaches. You can keep things as clean as possible, but there will always be a few. Especially, after it rains, they tend to come indoors where it is dry. I would just try to smash them, so they didn't start breeding in my house.
EDIT: I did not witness your Airbnb, of course; it is entirely possible that the place was infested. I was just put in mind of a friend who freaked out when she saw one single cockroach and told us our place was infested.
EDIT: I did not witness your Airbnb, of course; it is entirely possible that the place was infested. I was just put in mind of a friend who freaked out when she saw one single cockroach and told us our place was infested.
The place was at fault. There were crumbs in the edges of the floor in the kitchen and other nooks and crannies. If you don't want insects infesting your place, you should keep it clean and not feed them. I stayed in other AirBnBs too, and never saw cockroaches that size and in those numbers.
I would have followed up with that concern.
Sometimes their response is completely lacking, if they respond.
I had an incident where the airbnb owner neglected to mention she had pets. The hair was everywhere including the bed, making it impossible to breathe. So I contacted airbnb who refunded me after a lot of back and forth. Thus began a long night of calling completely booked hotels. The other Airbnb hosts required 24h minimum notification. We ended up staying at a partially renovated hotel.
Airbnb has been great for democratizing travel but some people have no business in hospitality.
I had an incident where the airbnb owner neglected to mention she had pets. The hair was everywhere including the bed, making it impossible to breathe. So I contacted airbnb who refunded me after a lot of back and forth. Thus began a long night of calling completely booked hotels. The other Airbnb hosts required 24h minimum notification. We ended up staying at a partially renovated hotel.
Airbnb has been great for democratizing travel but some people have no business in hospitality.
I had a similar issue with an Airbnb - the listing didn't mention pets, and the host ended up being an elderly person whose pet simply did its business on a patch of astroturf in the bathroom. The whole place stunk to high heaven.
I ended up relocating to a hotel.
My issue is that I feel that Airbnb reviews aren't trustworthy - this was a listing with a lot of reviews, not a single one mentioned the smell or the weird business with the dog, and all were absolutely glowing reviews. I find that a bit hard to believe.
It's the same way I feel about Grubhub/Seamless - even the sketchy deli with the expired meat somehow has a 4 out of 5 star rating. I'm pretty sure getting shut down by the health department would only merit a drop to 3.5 stars.
I no longer use Airbnb because I really just can't trust that the reviews are on the up and up.
I ended up relocating to a hotel.
My issue is that I feel that Airbnb reviews aren't trustworthy - this was a listing with a lot of reviews, not a single one mentioned the smell or the weird business with the dog, and all were absolutely glowing reviews. I find that a bit hard to believe.
It's the same way I feel about Grubhub/Seamless - even the sketchy deli with the expired meat somehow has a 4 out of 5 star rating. I'm pretty sure getting shut down by the health department would only merit a drop to 3.5 stars.
I no longer use Airbnb because I really just can't trust that the reviews are on the up and up.
Star inflation is a problem. Everybody wants to be 5 stars. Reviewing systems really struggle not to give loads of people the maximum score, thus making it useless.
One of the things that makes the Michelin guide stand out is that they've resisted the urge to be like "Oh, wow, restaurants suddenly all got awesome, every city in American now has fifty Michelin starred restaurants".
The UK decided to rate places that sell food with a star system, but it turns out that "Zero" is actually a valid rating, the regulator's perspective is that "Zero" means you did not break the rules badly enough to be shut down, so you're still open, so that's a zero. If you were worse than a zero, they would physically shut you down. You won't find any actual restaurants with a zero, but you definitely find places that sell food where you'd never think to check their rating and they have a zero because they didn't give a crap. So, the steak tartare in classy restaurant with a Five is probably safer than the hot dog in the corner store that got zero... but the government figures not enough people will get sick from those hot dogs to make it worth forcing the store to close.
One of the things that makes the Michelin guide stand out is that they've resisted the urge to be like "Oh, wow, restaurants suddenly all got awesome, every city in American now has fifty Michelin starred restaurants".
The UK decided to rate places that sell food with a star system, but it turns out that "Zero" is actually a valid rating, the regulator's perspective is that "Zero" means you did not break the rules badly enough to be shut down, so you're still open, so that's a zero. If you were worse than a zero, they would physically shut you down. You won't find any actual restaurants with a zero, but you definitely find places that sell food where you'd never think to check their rating and they have a zero because they didn't give a crap. So, the steak tartare in classy restaurant with a Five is probably safer than the hot dog in the corner store that got zero... but the government figures not enough people will get sick from those hot dogs to make it worth forcing the store to close.
'My issue is that I feel that Airbnb reviews aren't trustworthy...'
The problem with Airbnb reviews is that you are being reviewed too - so, although you can technically leave a bad review there is a social pressure not to.
I have also learned to be wary of places with a high number of reviews relative to others in the same area.
The problem with Airbnb reviews is that you are being reviewed too - so, although you can technically leave a bad review there is a social pressure not to.
I have also learned to be wary of places with a high number of reviews relative to others in the same area.
> "The problem with Airbnb reviews is that you are being reviewed too"
I think this is a huge part of the problem. When both sides of the transaction need to be reviewed positively by the other, you get into a situation where every review is either:
A - glowing and overflowing with superlative praise
B - raining nuclear hellfire down on the other party
It's an even more extreme version of star rating inflation I feel like, since nobody is going to speak their mind unless things have gotten really bad.
I think this is a huge part of the problem. When both sides of the transaction need to be reviewed positively by the other, you get into a situation where every review is either:
A - glowing and overflowing with superlative praise
B - raining nuclear hellfire down on the other party
It's an even more extreme version of star rating inflation I feel like, since nobody is going to speak their mind unless things have gotten really bad.
Airbnb doesn't publish those reviews until either both parties have written one, or the deadline to do so has expired.
I know but the social pressure still exists, especially when you have met the host face to face.
My experience is limited to Spain where you are often renting from an individual and they are genuinely nice but not exactly stretching themselves in the customer service department.
Elsewhere, it is probably different - especially where you have 'professional' hosts for whom there really is no excuse.
My experience is limited to Spain where you are often renting from an individual and they are genuinely nice but not exactly stretching themselves in the customer service department.
Elsewhere, it is probably different - especially where you have 'professional' hosts for whom there really is no excuse.
And sometimes they don't: https://twitter.com/goodyerin/status/935442561283559424
In a separate incident, Korean tourists in Fukuoka, Japan found hidden cameras in their AirBnB.
That said, AirBnB seems like a great example of a business that many would have thought impossible because of various kinds of social risks -- sexual assault, theft, etc. -- yet, with care taken, human decency prevails.
That said, AirBnB seems like a great example of a business that many would have thought impossible because of various kinds of social risks -- sexual assault, theft, etc. -- yet, with care taken, human decency prevails.
I'm not really sure an AirBnB would be any less safe then a previous small boutique licensed private hotel/bnb, these also operated out of peoples homes or even larger hotels for that matter. Basically anyone can gain access to a hotel and wait for your to leave your room and break in or assault you as you enter/exit.
At least with AirBnB you can leave reviews that are easily read by potential future guests.
At least with AirBnB you can leave reviews that are easily read by potential future guests.
An interesting thought exercise is to think about how much of your life is now being spent under surveillance. Not only all the cameras everywhere, but also Gmail, Facebook, and whatever else you might use. Maybe George Orwell's predictions aren't too far off.
Not only all the cameras everywhere, but also Gmail, Facebook, and whatever else you might use.
Personally, I believe a greater concern is the things other people are using.
If I choose to use Google or Facebook services or to carry a smartphone loaded with sensors and networking and spyware, that's down to me. There are plenty of valid concerns about transparency, but at least I have the option to not participate at all.
On the other hand, I have no control over whether someone on the next table over at a restaurant chooses to carry a smartphone that has some sort of always-observing technology built in, nor do I get any warning if they are doing so and my dinner conversation that would normally be reasonably private is being picked up by a mic and transmitted to the mothership.
Likewise, if I send an email to someone, while it has never been a 100% secure medium, it used to be the case that it was unlikely any third parties would see the message unless it was a system admin dealing with some sort of problem. Today a significant number of recipients are using a service like Google's to handle their mail, but possibly hidden behind their own domains and identity/branding. Consequently, those big mail services may in practice have access to a large amount of the email I have sent and may be processing it for all kinds of reasons without my knowledge or consent.
Same goes for services like social networks when they do things like uploading someone's whole address book from their phone after their app is installed. Now it's not just my friend or business contact who has my details, it's a social network, and they can associate those details with everyone else involved as well and start building up a detailed profile about me, again without my having any sort of direct relationship with them and without my knowledge or consent.
Personally, I believe a greater concern is the things other people are using.
If I choose to use Google or Facebook services or to carry a smartphone loaded with sensors and networking and spyware, that's down to me. There are plenty of valid concerns about transparency, but at least I have the option to not participate at all.
On the other hand, I have no control over whether someone on the next table over at a restaurant chooses to carry a smartphone that has some sort of always-observing technology built in, nor do I get any warning if they are doing so and my dinner conversation that would normally be reasonably private is being picked up by a mic and transmitted to the mothership.
Likewise, if I send an email to someone, while it has never been a 100% secure medium, it used to be the case that it was unlikely any third parties would see the message unless it was a system admin dealing with some sort of problem. Today a significant number of recipients are using a service like Google's to handle their mail, but possibly hidden behind their own domains and identity/branding. Consequently, those big mail services may in practice have access to a large amount of the email I have sent and may be processing it for all kinds of reasons without my knowledge or consent.
Same goes for services like social networks when they do things like uploading someone's whole address book from their phone after their app is installed. Now it's not just my friend or business contact who has my details, it's a social network, and they can associate those details with everyone else involved as well and start building up a detailed profile about me, again without my having any sort of direct relationship with them and without my knowledge or consent.
As time goes the cost of privacy is increasing. It become more burdensome and costly to maintain privacy. How do we adapt to the society where everything is public ?
I posted this not because of AirBnB and rather as a good example to show how low the barrier for surveillance through hardware (& software) is by now.
A few years ago this would have been quite expensive and not easy to do.
A few years ago this would have been quite expensive and not easy to do.
FWIW, hidden cams might not even have been installed by the host, but by a previous guest. On the other hand, the host would probably notice unless it's really well-hidden, unlike this one here.
>refund
This is pretty severe.
Don't get them get away with it. Sue.
This is pretty severe.
Don't get them get away with it. Sue.
How about getting the police involved? My guess is that this is a felony.
Also been reported elsewhere recently:
http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/airbnb-h...
http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/airbnb-h...
I guess disconnecting the apartment’s wifi could prevent the camera from transmitting anything?
Could still record locally for later access, though.
True. Any other recommendations? Disconnect the electricity? Scan the network to find any devices that look weird?
This sort of thing is an arms-race, and if you don't want to spend your life on counter-surveillance tech and opsec, you're not going to have any certainty.
Publicize, loudly, cases when someone violates your trust. Because that's what this reduces to; you're trusting whomever you're paying for that room. If they don't deserve that trust, ruin their income stream and they'll stop.
Applications of this approach to less-vulnerable violators left as an exercise, etc.
Publicize, loudly, cases when someone violates your trust. Because that's what this reduces to; you're trusting whomever you're paying for that room. If they don't deserve that trust, ruin their income stream and they'll stop.
Applications of this approach to less-vulnerable violators left as an exercise, etc.
Cheap cameras can record to SD cards, so the network doesn't necessarily help. I'd say disconnecting the electricity would probably work, but makes it a bit hard to use the house, no?
My suggestion would be to assume you might be being filmed, rather than assume you can avoid it.
My suggestion would be to assume you might be being filmed, rather than assume you can avoid it.
> assume you might be being filmed
If that's the assumption, my response would be to never stay in an AirBnB. What good is a house you're not comfortable changing or showering in, much less having sex?
If that's the assumption, my response would be to never stay in an AirBnB. What good is a house you're not comfortable changing or showering in, much less having sex?
Sure, if you feel uncomfortable with the possibility of being filmed naked, I think you are better off not staying.
Might as well up the paranoia level one click and never stay in a hotel, either.
Maybe my response was too paranoid. But certainly a well-known hotel chain has more to lose by misbehavior and bad publicity than an individual renting out their house does.
Usually hidden cameras are installed in hotels not by owners, but by staff.
How does one scan for these? I stay in AirBnbs all the time.
I would start scanning a local network to see if there's any devices that I can't identify. If there are, I would try to trace them down, and, if unsuccessful, turn the router off and switch to mobile hotspot.
This is under the assumption that the cameras don't store the data locally, which they probably do. In that case, I don't have any ideas what to do if you can spot them on the local network but can't trace them down physically.
This is under the assumption that the cameras don't store the data locally, which they probably do. In that case, I don't have any ideas what to do if you can spot them on the local network but can't trace them down physically.
Upvoted, but is there not some sort of device I could buy to find electronics? I literally have spent 85% of the past half year in AirBnbs and I hate worrying about this.
Bring some extra sheets and just drape them over everything? A sophisticated enough camera will not be detected without a thorough and possibly destructive search.
Some way to improve this :
make the camera difficult to access by the guest.
Remove all label or marking indicating its a camera.
Tweet the address so he's an embarrassment to his neighbors. Maybe that'll deter some people.
I'm unexpectedly being downvoted. In case it's because I was misunderstood, I meant that people such as this tweeter should "name and shame" the hosts who do this, so that future hosts are afraid to do it.
[deleted]
Its a two way street. I had friends put an annoyatron in an airbnb they were staying in and knew I was going to stay in a few days later. So its not just the hosts you have to worry about...
This is one of the reasons we created Point which we just released the 2nd generation of on Kickstarter: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/minut/pointthe-friendly...
You created Point to find hidden cameras in AirBNBs?
I mean nice try pumping your product, but come on.
I mean nice try pumping your product, but come on.
One of the reasons I think we've seen this over and over is due to lack of alternatives to monitor homes in a non-invasive way. Hosts naturally care about their apartments when they rent out. And hiding a camera is, judging from many comments here and Airbnb, not the right way.
But yes, you're right. I'm definitely pumping our own product :)
But yes, you're right. I'm definitely pumping our own product :)
https://www.airbnb.com/help/article/887/what-are-airbnb-s-ru...
"Legal gray area" or not, it's not allowed by Airbnb.