Close Menu
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
  • Home
  • News
    • Politics
    • Legal & Courts
    • Tech & Big Tech
    • Campus & Education
    • Media & Culture
    • Global Free Speech
  • Opinions
    • Debates
  • Video/Live
  • Community
  • Freedom Index
  • About
    • Mission
    • Contact
    • Support
Trending

Bitcoin pulls back as another golden cross fails to deliver

34 seconds ago

Hyperliquid Faces Regulatory Risk Despite DEX Lead: Neuner

6 minutes ago

OpenAI Asks Congress Whether an AI Slowdown Would Be Legal

10 minutes ago
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Facebook X (Twitter) Discord Telegram
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
Market Data Newsletter
Friday, September 11
  • Home
  • News
    • Politics
    • Legal & Courts
    • Tech & Big Tech
    • Campus & Education
    • Media & Culture
    • Global Free Speech
  • Opinions
    • Debates
  • Video/Live
  • Community
  • Freedom Index
  • About
    • Mission
    • Contact
    • Support
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
Home»AI & Censorship»Cold TAKE: Amazon’s New Encryption Method Still Doesn’t Deliver Real Privacy
AI & Censorship

Cold TAKE: Amazon’s New Encryption Method Still Doesn’t Deliver Real Privacy

News RoomBy News Room2 hours agoNo Comments6 Mins Read1 Views
Share Facebook Twitter Pinterest Copy Link LinkedIn Tumblr Email VKontakte Telegram
Cold TAKE: Amazon’s New Encryption Method Still Doesn’t Deliver Real Privacy
Share
Facebook Twitter Pinterest Email Copy Link

Listen to the article

0:00
0:00

Key Takeaways

Playback Speed

Select a Voice

Amazon recently debuted a new feature for its Ring cameras that the company is calling Throw Away the Key Encryption (TAKE). The idea is to cut back on the amount of video content available to the company, and thus potentially available to law enforcement. But while it might technically add a speed bump to accessing full video content, it doesn’t deliver nearly the level of privacy we should be demanding from video doorbells and other security cameras.

TAKE introduces a new way for Ring to manage encryption keys, where the user’s device has its key, then the company holds encryption keys temporarily within its own cloud infrastructure. Ring’s servers receive the keys temporarily so it can offer a variety of the features it says it can’t offer when a user chooses to use end-to-end encryption, like video descriptions, smart alerts, video search, and more, then deletes the key after 24 hours. 

This differs from how it works now, where footage is encrypted in transit and at rest, then decrypted by Ring, which always has access to the footage, to process those features. 

Comparatively, this is an improvement to the default settings Ring has now, because it at least puts some restrictions on historical footage, but it has some serious holes worth exploring.

Ring Gets Access to Unencrypted Video for a Short Period

Ring has designed its service so many of its camera features, including smart alerts and video search, need cloud processing to work. That means to provide those features, Ring needs to decrypt the footage while it’s stored in Ring’s cloud servers. 

With TAKE, in order to decrypt footage to offer these features, Ring gets access to footage stored in the cloud for 24 hours. TAKE adds some small measures using secure enclaves to make base key material harder to directly export, but keys are still released to services that can be modified. With access to the keys, the cloud processing does its thing and delivers the requested feature to the user. The key is then deleted 24 hours later—until the user wants to watch an old video or use other so-called “smart” features, at which point the keys are sent back to the server. 

In practice, that makes the system as a whole barely different from encryption at rest where the server holds the keys. The client device essentially takes the place of a hardware security module (HSM), including making those keys available to the server whenever they’re needed. The end result is an improvement from the status quo, but still not even close to the privacy protections of end-to-end encryption. 

The company says it does not keep backups of the keys and there’s no way for a Ring employee to access footage. It also claims that any decrypted content is deleted from its servers. 

But that doesn’t mean much when user actions send the keys back to the server. And making features like “Video Search” and “Smart Video Descriptions” available to the device owner means that while the footage can’t be seen by Ring, descriptions are readily available to the company. In response to a question about capability, Ring responded to us that, “As Ring continues to expand and further strengthen TAKE’s protections, video descriptions will be included.”

Plus, account recovery keys are stored in the camera itself by default. When that’s paired with the fact that currently, indices of video contents are available to the company, it means that TAKE isn’t even a protection against mass surveillance. Law enforcement could request a mass search across cameras for certain terms, then delve into further details by seizing cameras of interest from the device-owner, decrypting account backups, and using that information to decrypt encrypted videos. 

Law Enforcement May Still Seek to Compel Access to Footage

Because of the ways the access and key rotations work, it’s technically still possible for Ring to alter its current practice if compelled to do so by law enforcement, in much the same way as other existing encryption-at-rest systems where the company holds the keys. For example, Ring could receive an order that demands they save content encryption keys or unencrypted videos from memory to disk, which would mean they’d retain some level of access. 

In an email to EFF, Ring stated, “By design, under TAKE, Ring will not be able to provide encryption keys or decrypted content. With TAKE, Ring will only preserve and provide encrypted video files in response to valid legal process. It has been and continues to be Ring’s policy to object to overbroad legal requests.” EFF specifically asked about the possibility of complying with law enforcement orders to modify existing practice to turn over or preserve unencrypted video, which appears to be technically possible, but the company did not address it.

End-to-end encryption works to maintain trust by its user base because the company that employs it never has access to the keys at any point, making it impossible for itself to access the encrypted contents. This also means law enforcement can’t demand the service retain keys or choose not to rotate them. As described, this level of protection isn’t offered with TAKE.

Ultimately, Ring is the one managing this software and its implementation, and beyond a white paper, “trust us” is the only level of verification they’re offering outside observers. While it doesn’t fix the issues, at the bare minimum, the company needs to open the entire infrastructure up to third-party auditors to verify its claims. Ring seems to agree, as they told us that, “Ring conducts rigorous security reviews of all products before launch and critical components of TAKE’s infrastructure underwent independent security testing prior to launch. We are exploring options for further independent review.”

TAKE is not end-to-end encryption, where Ring would never have access to the keys, and the company thankfully doesn’t claim it as such. Ring already offers the option for end-to-end encryption, and turning that on by default would offer the real sorts of privacy improvements we all want from video doorbells. 

Read the full article here

Fact Checker

Verify the accuracy of this article using AI-powered analysis and real-time sources.

Get Your Fact Check Report

Enter your email to receive detailed fact-checking analysis

5 free reports remaining

Continue with Full Access

You've used your 5 free reports. Sign up for unlimited access!

Already have an account? Sign in here

#DigitalCensorship #FreeExpression #InternetFreedom #ShadowBanning #TechCensorship #Web3
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email Telegram Copy Link
News Room
  • Website
  • Facebook
  • X (Twitter)
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn

The FSNN News Room is the voice of our in-house journalists, editors, and researchers. We deliver timely, unbiased reporting at the crossroads of finance, cryptocurrency, and global politics, providing clear, fact-driven analysis free from agendas.

Related Articles

Media & Culture

DHS Claimed It Had Found 16,000 Illegal Voters In Nevada. Now It’s Admitting It’s Less Than 200.

36 minutes ago
Media & Culture

White House Website Briefly Hosted Racist Tetris Clone Game Until The Tetris People Complained

16 hours ago
AI & Censorship

Digital Sovereignty: What It Is, What It Could Be

22 hours ago
AI & Censorship

We All Deserve a Better Internet, Not A Smaller One

23 hours ago
Media & Culture

Daily Deal: InfoSec4TC Projects Hub

2 days ago
AI & Censorship

2026 EFF Award Winners: Access Now, 7amleh – The Arab Center for the Advancement of Social Media, DeFlock, and New Media Rights

2 days ago
Add A Comment
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

Editors Picks

Hyperliquid Faces Regulatory Risk Despite DEX Lead: Neuner

6 minutes ago

OpenAI Asks Congress Whether an AI Slowdown Would Be Legal

10 minutes ago

DHS Claimed It Had Found 16,000 Illegal Voters In Nevada. Now It’s Admitting It’s Less Than 200.

36 minutes ago

Restriction on K-12 Teaching of Certain Race/Sex-Related “Concepts” Not Unconstitutionally Vague

36 minutes ago
Latest Posts

Copyright law – which is meant to protect writers and reporters – is being used against us. In Azerbaijan, Somalia and Florida, unfounded copyright complaints have recently been deployed to make critical reporting disappear. The misuse of copyright law isn’t new, but to read three similar stories in quick succession takes it from being a tool used sporadically (and egregiously) to stifle dissent to something that feels far more calculated and embedded. I was first alerted to the trend last week when I received an email from Gunel Safarova, acting editor-in-chief of Azerbaijani outlet Abzas Media. Safarova’s email alerted the international community to the fact that Meta had recently blocked the Instagram pages of Abzas and a host of other independent media outlets and individual journalists from the country, following accusations of copyright infringement. Then I read a similar story out of Somalia, and another one again from the USA. In the case of Azerbaijan, Safarova said that even though the complainants apparently provided no evidence to show that they owned the intellectual property, Meta’s automated systems accepted the complaints regardless. Articles were removed, and in some cases entire Facebook accounts were deactivated. The Azerbaijan journalists believe the attacks are coordinated and are being carried out deliberately from the same central source. Safarova has called them a “continuation of a broader campaign of pressure and repression aimed at silencing independent media”. In Somalia, an investigation published by the Somali Journalists Syndicate listed numerous examples of independent media houses and journalists fighting coordinated fake copyright claims and content takedowns. The targeted stories were typically critical of the Somali federal government and state security agencies. Like in Azerbaijan, the online crackdown in Somalia is unfolding alongside growing restrictions on social media content and an increasingly hostile media environment (see our recent article for more). Mid-August, stories posted by the South Florida Sun Sentinel, WLRN, Florida Politics and other news outlets were removed from Google search results. The stories all concerned congressional candidate Michael Carbonara, an entrepreneur running in the Republican primary for Florida’s 22nd Congressional District last month. (He lost, to Casey Asker.) Some of the stories mentioned Carbonara’s ties to a controversial data centre in Michigan. David Schutz, managing editor at the Sun Sentinel, said: “Federal copyright law exists for an important reason: to protect original work from being stolen. It was never intended to be weaponized as a loophole to suppress reporting or hide inconvenient truths.” Schutz also highlighted the automated aspect of rights management processes, noting that systems have been created that are “far too easy for bad actors to manipulate”. This, I think, is a generous take. Copyright violations do happen, and social media platforms are right to take action against them. At the same time automated, AI-driven and anonymous complaints make processing fraudulent takedown notices easier and the job of moderators harder. (Index is running a feature about this in our forthcoming magazine, a thought experiment by contributor Kaya Genç.) A less generous take on the current state of affairs is this: tech companies are too quick and willing to trade free speech rights for access. Whatever the reason, the outcome is the same; “Page not found” are the three words that every censor loves to see. READ MORE

49 minutes ago

The legal drama of imprisoned Sam Bankman-Fried is waiting on its last act

1 hour ago

US CPI Data Sparks Risk-Asset Upside as Bitcoin Eyes $80,000 Mark

1 hour ago

Subscribe to News

Get the latest news and updates directly to your inbox.

At FSNN – Free Speech News Network, we deliver unfiltered reporting and in-depth analysis on the stories that matter most. From breaking headlines to global perspectives, our mission is to keep you informed, empowered, and connected.

FSNN.net is owned and operated by GlobalBoost Media
, an independent media organization dedicated to advancing transparency, free expression, and factual journalism across the digital landscape.

Facebook X (Twitter) Discord Telegram
Latest News

Bitcoin pulls back as another golden cross fails to deliver

34 seconds ago

Hyperliquid Faces Regulatory Risk Despite DEX Lead: Neuner

6 minutes ago

OpenAI Asks Congress Whether an AI Slowdown Would Be Legal

10 minutes ago

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest news and updates directly to your inbox.

© 2026 GlobalBoost Media. All Rights Reserved.
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Our Authors
  • Contact

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

🍪

Cookies

We and our selected partners wish to use cookies to collect information about you for functional purposes and statistical marketing. You may not give us your consent for certain purposes by selecting an option and you can withdraw your consent at any time via the cookie icon.

Cookie Preferences

Manage Cookies

Cookies are small text that can be used by websites to make the user experience more efficient. The law states that we may store cookies on your device if they are strictly necessary for the operation of this site. For all other types of cookies, we need your permission. This site uses various types of cookies. Some cookies are placed by third party services that appear on our pages.

Your permission applies to the following domains:

  • https://fsnn.net
Necessary
Necessary cookies help make a website usable by enabling basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website. The website cannot function properly without these cookies.
Statistic
Statistic cookies help website owners to understand how visitors interact with websites by collecting and reporting information anonymously.
Preferences
Preference cookies enable a website to remember information that changes the way the website behaves or looks, like your preferred language or the region that you are in.
Marketing
Marketing cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.