Come to believe people or consumers do not want cloud service for a product from a company that m...

[G+_Rud Dog]

Come to believe people or consumers do not want cloud service for a product from a company that may or may not be around in a year or more. If these companies provide local browser access to what ever hardware they sell then maybe spending my dollars with them makes sense.

But, it seems the motivating factor is not convenience for the customer but money making monthly revenue for the seller. Therefore you are not likely to see a local LAN browser or desktop app to access these products.

This burns my candle at both ends.

 

Example, really good looking outdoor porch lights with build in cameras but forget about getting local access to cameras. All access is through the company's servers. What do you do when they go out of business?

This is not the only instance where this has been found to be the policy of companies bringing IOT devices to the market, there are others.

But now that I have voiced my frustration, I feel better.

 

Have a nice day.

[G+_Jason Brown]

I never thought about that. I had a Ring, returned it, I was really disappointed. But had I keep it and they went under, your right. I'd basically have had a paper weight.

 

I think foscam still allows local access to all their devices. But my understanding is they have a lot of insecure firmwares out there, that they don't plan on updating.

[G+_Black Merc]

I figure if it is cloud mandatory... It's spying on me, for the reason of 'i have no direct control'.

[G+_Ben Reese]

I don't know for sure, but I suspect there's quite a bit of expense in updating the software.

They could sell a cheap camera that everyone buys but doesn't earn them enough to update the software.

They could raise the price to cover those updates, but then fewer would be willing to pay the cost.

They could lock in their users and force subscription costs that cover the software updates.

 

My thought is buy cheap cameras that may never get updates, but then lock them down to an internal network only - and even more restricted if they're wireless cameras. Use a controller software that you know will get updated (like Synology or Qnap Surveillance Station).

 

I like the idea of Ring for someone like widow friend who's now a single mother of 3, or my parents, or less tech-savvy friends. Some people need a plug-n-play solution.

 

There. Now I've shared my 2¢.

[G+_Black Merc]

What needs to happen is simular to the wrt router and open source firmware. If we can get a parallel like that in the IOT world then(imho) we will be better off.

[G+_Golden Retriever]

I have another concern not just about cloud service security devices, but IOT security devices in general, one of the SN shows was talking about how numerous manufacturers of security DVRs we're using the same main boards and that many of these were shown reporting back to some IP in China, well the company I work for installs unmaned mini stores in manufacturing facilities they have racks and shelves coolers and freezer cases and a self-checkout kiosk just like you find it a grocery store, lost control is monitored by cameras and DVRs while they are not hosted on a cloud service they usually piggyback on the clients Network for inventory security feed reviews and credit card processing.

Many of these clients are involved in the defense industry, and while the cameras themselves are unlikely to capture any sensitive information, name tags are away for a hostile State actor to attempt to recruit a more traditional espionage candidate to say nothing of having a device inside your network.