Caring vs snooping - smartapp collects data from devices and sensors of another person's home

[indieshuffle]

Hello all,

I have just checked my email and saw something that I wanted to run by you wise women.

Its from Carers UK telling me about a new product/service from Hive, by Centrica/ British Gas, where data about the carees home use and movements can be viewed remotely on a smartapp on the phone of another person.

Its not cameras, but is things like kettle being on, doors being open etc so involves sensors an smart devices. The blurb says it lets you know if the morning or night-time routine is being followed, but it is very vague on detail (always makes me suspicious)

I can see how in a utopian world that this might give carers some peace of mind if they cannot be there in person (my own gran is very elderly and vulnerable but wants to live alone still and of course we worry), but actually I find the premise a bit alarming given that much of society is largely so ignorant to safeguarding and coercion etc, and my immediate thought was of how this intrusive technology could also be mis-used.

The cared for person has to give consent but how stringently would that be policed? What if there is coercion, or a level of confusion. How would the British Gas engineer know to recognise that or be qualified to know when to refuse to accept a person's consent. Will they be given training? Or will it just need a signature with no consent required in person? The devices could be given as gifts with the recipient knowing what they features they have. I think things like this really ought to have the sign-off of a solicitor to prove the caree has been given independent legal advice.

Its too early for me to call to check what safeguard they have, but even so, safeguarding well how knows what that means nowadays.

What if a determined man wants to spy on his wife/ex and finds a way to get it installed without her knowledge or understanding? When Hive/British Gas have a financial incentive to sign people up and install, and who knows even quotas, are they really going to be independent and circumspect?

I don't know. The whole thing just makes me uneasy. Personally we are refusing a smart meter but as renters we may have no choice of we move house and one is already installed, but also we wont have smart devices on TVs or kettles etc.

Never mind the issue of giving data to Centrica/British Gas. Plus the government now has so much more access to our personal information since that bill was passed so may have access to snoop on our smart devices etc. I know some would write me off as a tin hatter but with this TRA stuff, I cannot ignore just how vulnerable we still are to new ideologies, lack of safeguarding and understanding of coercion and abuse of power etc, lack of critical thinking etc and I'm more cautious than ever.

I think in general, humans are not evolved enough to use this kind of technology responsibly, and I think women are particularly vulnerable to its mis-use.

Plus even limited to its legitimate use, it could get quite annoying for a person to be checked up on just because on morning they haven't put the kettle on yet and their relatives can see that they haven't but actually they are fine. It could actually be quite anxiety provoking in some respects.

I'm not liking this modern world much right now.

I see what you mean perking, and probably many people would need less than is offered. However, DM has an upstairs kettle for when she is under the weather. If she stopped going downstairs at all, the motion sensor could tell me. It's something I'd need to know. I'd also like to know if she stopped going out, or if she left the front door wide open for hours on a regular basis.

Sadly people aren't always aware when their routine changes to the point of needing more support or intervention.

Agree peking.

A person has the right not to be checked up on or answer the phone a la picklemepopcorn's mum, but they could end up agreeing to a monitoring app just to alleviate a relative's (possibly unreasonable) anxiety. Or even so that no one has to bother coming to see them that day.

Not saying this is you picklemepopcorn at all but it will be some people.

It will be beneficial to some but that's why I said it should require solicitor's advice, and not in the presence of the carer. By dint of someone claiming it is needed, the person is obviously vulnerable.

The advantages of this system for carers

Interesting formulation.

Isn't the advantage supposed to be to the cared-for person?

When you imagine this situation, do you see yourself in the role of the carer? Rather than in the role of the monitored person?

I'm disabled. I see this situation from the role of the monitored person.

So, popcorn's mum might decide she would benefit from one sensor, either on the downstairs kettle socket or on a mat at the bottom of the stairs.

And from one on the front door.

And that they should only send you alerts if she hasn't used them for X hours: you and she would decide between you what would work best for her and for you getting the alert.

What the Centrica system proposes, monitoring the whole bedtime routine and telling a carer about it...

Well, the carer might feel they want to know about it. It might reassure them. But at this point, we're now treating the carer.

The monitored person might feel like they don't want people to know about it, and have come to this conclusion during periods when they are quite well and lucid.

If the carer decides that they know best and they're going to do it for the monitored person's own good, against their wishes... Well, the whole pretext there's consent is out of the window now, isn't it?

I see it with relation to DM at the moment, and I think she would like it too (as long as it didn't cost her anything!) because she's afraid of no one noticing if she's had a fall.

I was afraid when I was pregnant or had small children. I didn't want the children to be on their own with my body until DH comes in from work. If I were a single parent I'd definitely want it.

I'd see the risk of needing help as greater than the risk of being abused, and see this system as a plus. Given that controlling abusive people are fitting tracking devices and cameras already, I'd say this is an improvement as it is more accountable and overseen.

If I were going to fit a system without consent, it wouldn't be this one.

I'm chuckling a little as I remember my strong willed grandad. He moved into sheltered accommodation with my grandma, due to his poor health. They had an alarm they could pull, which we occasionally did accidentally, and a disembodied voice would say 'Hello Jim, everything ok?'. I think they did a morning call too- pretty much the same. "Morning Joan, how are you today?".
He got triple bolts and locks fitted on the front door, so no one could have got in if needed, anyway!

I'm trying to find it, Perking

Technology designed to record, remotely store, and learn the typical behaviour pattern of someone in multiple points throughout their property, and actively send alerts when the person does anything different, is potentially as intrusive as a fixed camera in a single room which would then have to be viewed to be interpreted.

And you know, it's not like there's any rule saying an abuser is only allowed to fit one technology.

As a genuine choice, there can be a use for some of this technology. But I echo what others say above about the gung-ho installation of IoT with very little thought for the implications. Often with a chocolate-box label of "for the sake of the children!" or "for the sake of the elderly". Or a cool-cat label: "It's a speaker for your-music-that-is-your-life, dude."

Yeah. No.

It's a surveillance device, and increasingly a control device too.

Thanks, Ereshkigal. I'll have a poke around later myself, too.

I looked up IoT womanformerly and yes exactly. Weaponised. Not happy with any of that stuff.

I belong to an IOT (Internet of Things) meetup and specifically asked the geeks there about the technical ins and outs - I am appalled at the lack of any sort of standards in place meaning it's made real easy by lazy implementation for any joeblow to weaponise them.

They are already being used to horrendously monitor, stalk and harass in DV/coercive control. It's also very hard to get evidence unless you have access to technical resource who think as deviously as the predators.

Any device can be turned into a tracking/listening/spying station and GPS devices especially in cars, phones etc are extensively abused to monitor and then stalk/harass. Tech abuse is prevalent in around 90% of DV cases where I am and there is no expertise women can call on easily to help them out normally. The police have zero expertise and most guys who could assist withhold their expertise.

Just wanted to say that in the experience of experts working in this area, none of these devices (whether that's a smart meter for your electricity or monitoring devices as described here) have security features designed into them from the outset that makes them safe from being hacked or accessed remotely by third parties.

Read a novel once about how you could hack smart meters to crash the entire European power grid with the resulting catastrophic collapse of infrastructure etc. Then asked one of those experts about it and they confirmed, the premise is not fiction but based on available facts. And they were urgently trying to convince power companies to change their approach to security.

So now, every time I get offered a smart meter installation, I ask them what measures are in place to protect the smart meter from remote access/hacking by third parties and the answer is either complete ignorance, shock or the admission that there is nothing in place (got told once that's because there'd be no reason for anyone to do such a thing).

Also, my mother runs a care company. Respecting the dignity and privacy of her clients is at the heart of everything they do. Their service aims to allow the elderly to live out their lives with as much autonomy as is possible and these devices stand in the way of that. Yes, it does provide peace of mind. But something that monitors adherence to routine is one of the more extreme intrusions into the privacy of your home and life.

And as discussed by PP there is a range of other, non-monitoring options, too.

Sort of connected:
twitter.com/DAWarksPolice/status/1085102441492819968?s=20

MrsWooster

DI Simon Mason
@ DAWarksPolice
Something to be aware of. A member of staff from a local refuge told us at a conference recently that it is now part of their welcome procedures to take any new resident's vehicle to a local garage to be checked. Shockingly, a significant proportion had been fitted with trackers.
DI Simon Mason Retweeted Integrated Anti-Stalking Unit

Not sure if this is relevant but aren't these companies getting kettle usage data etc from smart meters and gadgets so they can eventually start charging us more during our own individual peak usage times? Or working outsome algorithm to get more money out of us anyway. I'm not getting a smart meter.

Smart meters are NOT mandatory.

Just linking these to read later (thanks for heads up, Ereshkigal, I'm guessing this is the thread you meant).

Gender and IoT (Internet of Things) resource list
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3298753-Gender-and-IoT-Internet-of-Things-resource-list

Smart home gadgets in domestic abuse warning'
www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44765830

YY Perking, thanks! I hate trying to use advanced search on a phone.

Some good links in the thread. I did some reading at the time.

Adding for Perking this article I just found while looking for something else:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/smart-gadgets-open-door-to-stalking-and-abuse-say-police-5xk8n7r9m

Yikes.

Thanks, Eresh. I can only read the freebie part of that article, but looks like stalking via Internet of Things is already, well, a thing. Or in the police's opinion, set to become one.

IOT devices have no effective monitoring so they all can be weaponised easily

In addition, there's remarkably little attention paid to the fact that most of these devices collect metadata that is way beyond their remit and store it in services to which others have access.

Elsewhere, I've expressed how startled I was when metadata resistance was illustrated by discussing metadata leak from internet-enabled sex accessories. E.g., cock rings recording number of thrusts, identity of partner, variety of sex play etc.

I'm a times subscriber, but I'm not sure how to do a share token. I'll try to find out. It's worth reading for the specific examples given. One man controlled the heating to make his menopausal wife's hot flushes worse.

arran

A family members DH monitors her water usage by monitoring the smart meter or some other device. He’s a controlling c*nt anyway and also monitors whose knocking on the door ie friend and when they leave.
I would never put up with being spied on but people seem to believe it’s for their own good! Effing idiots!

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/smart-gadgets-open-door-to-stalking-and-abuse-say-police-5xk8n7r9m?shareToken=e144650f3c03d1bfc527005c496d813e

Eresh I click the email opion from article and then c&p the share token link.

Ereshkigal - I was very taken aback and I'm very concerned that there is a possibility that metadata from what is known as The Internet of Dongs might be used in legal settings as justification for sexual activities and consent as well as being a method of coercive control. (Remotely-controlled sex accessories are being promoted as a way of bringing a personal interaction to long-distance relationships. Inevitably, there is some indication of them being used to coerce young people.)