TechForge

28th January 2020

Share this story:

Tags:

Categories::

Amazon’s smart doorbell company Ring has found itself at the centre of yet another user privacy scandal.

A report published by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) claims that Ring's Android app is sending an excessive amount of personally identifiable data to third parties. 

EFF's report suggests that the app sends personal data to four trackers including Facebook's Graph API, analytics firms Mixpanel and AppsFlyer, and "deep linking" platform Branch.

The most concerning part of the allegations is that the EFF claims Ring is sending the data without explicit consent from users. In some jurisdictions, this is likely a breach of privacy laws such as the EU's GDPR.

Information sent to the trackers reportedly includes names, IP addresses, device identifiers, timezones, language preferences, and even certain actions performed via the app.

Here’s an example of some data the EFF found Ring’s Android app sending to Facebook:

graph-facebook-com

According to Ring, “like many companies, Ring uses third-party service providers to evaluate the use of our mobile app” and the company “ensures that service providers’ use of the data provided is contractually limited to appropriate purposes.”

Of course, the concern here is that the third parties aren’t truly accountable to Ring and such trackers can build a much bigger profile of an individual using even small bits of data.

“The danger in sending even small bits of information is that analytics and tracking companies are able to combine these bits together to form a unique picture of the user’s device,” the EFF notes in their report.

Ever since Ring was acquired by Amazon, it has naturally come under increased scrutiny with regards to user privacy and security.

One of the most recent concerns surrounded a controversial partnership with 300 police forces across the US for a feature called Neighbors. Because the Neighbors app allows people to be flagged as suspicious, privacy campaigners are concerned it may lead to increased racial profiling or more surveillance of innocent individuals.

A report published by Mozilla last September highlighted Ring’s weak privacy measures. Only nine of 76 devices failed Mozilla’s test, and four of them were Ring’s (essentially the company’s whole product line). The main reasons for Ring’s products failing Mozilla’s tests were poor encryption policies and vulnerability management.

Also last year, a couple’s Ring doorbell was hacked and the perpetrator demanded 50 Bitcoins (worth ~$400,000) as a ransom – issuing a death threat if they did not comply. A report from Motherboard found software available for as little as $6 to compromise Ring doorbells.

Ring was often cited as an example of how the smart home can modernise things which have been left relatively unchanged for decades. Hopefully, Ring will begin setting a better example of user privacy and security practices for the IoT industry.

Interested in hearing industry leaders discuss subjects like this? Attend the co-located 5G Expo, IoT Tech Expo, Blockchain Expo, AI & Big Data Expo, and Cyber Security & Cloud Expo World Series with upcoming events in Silicon Valley, London, and Amsterdam.

About the Author

Senior Editor

Ryan Daws is a senior editor at TechForge Media with over a decade of experience in weaving narratives and dissecting complex topics. His articles and interviews with industry leaders have earned him recognition as a key tech influencer from numerous organisations. Under his leadership, publications have been praised by analyst firms for their excellence and performance. Connect with him on X, Mastodon, Bluesky, Threads, and/or LinkedIn.

Related

6th October 2026

2nd October 2026

1st October 2026

30th September 2026

Join our Community

Subscribe now to get all our premium content and latest tech news delivered straight to your inbox

Popular

6111 view(s)
2789 view(s)
2488 view(s)
2079 view(s)

Subscribe

All our premium content and latest tech news delivered straight to your inbox

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.