this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2026
393 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy

48886 readers
966 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Hello people, my family recently bought a Renault 5 e-tech. The car itself is great, but there are some aspects that creep me out, especially the driver-facing camera. We didn't actually know that such a camera existed before we bought the car, it was only mentioned as the car was given to us.

The cameras official purpose is to see, if you are tired and paying attention to the road, by some "AI magic", I suppose. You can also let it scan your face, so that you automatically get logged into your profile.

I personally think, that that is kinda creepy, especially as there is no visual indication if the camera is currently recording and no official way to disable the camera hardware-wise. When it is being coverd, the car immediately complains about it.

When talking to friends or family about it, I got one of two reactions: equal concern, or "nice feature actually", "what about the camera on your laptop?", "you are way too paranoid", "I have noting to hide; it is only me driving being recorded".

I have also seen such cameras in other cars, BYD for example.

What do you think, is this creepy or am I too paranoid? Does anyone know where the actual data is processed, on device or on some cloud server? Do you have any experience with such cameras? I couldn't really find any information about it on the internet.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] stupidcasey@lemmy.world 1 points 1 minute ago

Black tape ought to solve it, if not a pair of wire cutters.

[–] boboliosisjones@feddit.nu 6 points 1 hour ago

I think it's unacceptable and indicative of this dangerous path we are headed down as whole. There's already been a few write ups on how cars are the most privacy disrespecting "devices" out there, which is wild considering we have smartphones.

With the driver facing camera we have no control over it also has complete access to our travel data, probably knows exactly who we are in the car with, records all our private conversations etc. etc.

It's so tiring to hear people defend this as if privacy is a thing of the past and anyone advocating it is being dramatic.

[–] bridgeburner@lemmy.world 6 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

I fckn hate these laws that force so much tech into new cars under the guise of safety. Not only is it a massive breach in privacy (I don't care if the car manufacturers claim they don't use this data for identification, I won't belive them), but it also makes small cars way more expensive, comparatively. Fck this sh*t, cars have been becoming obnoxiously expensive and forced BS tech like that just makes everything worse.

[–] iocase@lemmy.zip 1 points 22 minutes ago

It's rent seeking through regulations. It's too expensive to make a simple car that also complies with these regulations. The only people who can afford to do it are gigantic established brands with a century of production lines and established infrastructure.

"Oh no. More car brands failed. We can't let them fail can we? Allow us to merge more?"

"Oh no. We're in trouble financially. If we die you won't have cars at all any more because we merged everything. Lots and lots of your voters will be pissed if that happens. There's also no way in hell a new car brand is going to establish itself when it costs so damn much to meet these regulations we lobbied and guided to benefit our established interests"

[–] boboliosisjones@feddit.nu 1 points 44 minutes ago

Clearly they use it for identification if as the OP said the camera can be used to load your driver profile. As far as I know that goes directly against the EU law stating no biometric data can be processed by the camera.

[–] DieserTypMatthias@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

I'll just buy a second-hand 2011 Skoda Fabia. Compact car that just works and doesn't spy on you. Though I'd rather buy the LPG version of it because it costs 86 eurocents/liter here.

[–] endless_nameless@lemmy.world 9 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I'm cool with just not driving. Fuck you, car manufacturers. If I can't feasibly live a lifestyle on public transit I'll buy the oldest shittiest shitbox on Earth and drive it until it fucking explodes.

[–] TotalCourage007@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

I'm desperately holding on to my Ford Ranger for this exact reason. Obligatory Fuck car manufacturers.

[–] yogurt@lemmy.world 6 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Required in the EU and will be required in the US soon. BYD's big export market is Australia which doesn't require them yet but they're mandatory to get a good crash safety rating.

Renault and a lot of BYDs use Android as the software os, so probably it's Android doing the facial recognition (and also probably the attention eye tracking) and that's onboard.

Renault has a dashcam function that records from the built in cameras, but you have to plug in your own USB drive, so the upside of memory price-fixing is it's probably not worth it for Renault to spend $300 to store the data now.

[–] DieserTypMatthias@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 hour ago

So it'll be possible to root the car through an OBD2 port, theoretically.

[–] pineapple@lemmy.ml 12 points 4 hours ago

Your concern is definitely justified. This is creepy as hell.

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 14 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

It's an EU decision. It will be coming to many more cars as it will be mandatory from July 2026 for all newly registered vehicles. Renault 5 is simply one of the first new cars to feature it.

According to the same law, it is illegal to use the system in a way that can identify the person, it may not save biometrics, and it must function in closed loop without sharing the data. It's looking for things like head nodding or looking away from the road for more than 3.5 seconds while driving over 50 km/h. The camera is likely using infrared lighting as it should also work at night.

Anyway. According to the manual, it can be disabled by double tapping a button on the steering wheel or through the touch screen menus, though it will default to being enabled everytime you start the car as per the legal requirement.

If you cover it with tape, wear a mask or drive somebody else's car in which you don't have a profile saved, it will simply use the last previous profile and show an icon in the dashboard as a warning that the function isn't working.

[–] aikhae@lemmy.ohaa.xyz 1 points 1 hour ago

Thank you for the clarification!

I wish, Renault and/or the salesperson would communicate clearly about the camera. It's way creepier when there is just a camera looking at you without having the context of it being required and which privacy requirements it has per law.

Interestingly, if I disable the function and then cover the camera, a warning still appears. I don't know if that's due to a weird implementation by Renault or a thing implied by the law

[–] jaypatelani@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 hours ago

Monthly subscription for safety features coming soon 🔜

[–] autonomous@lemmy.world 5 points 6 hours ago

Find and disable the antenna used by the cars electronics.

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 35 points 9 hours ago (1 children)
[–] fubbernuckin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

The car complains when the camera is covered. At a minimum that means making annoying sounds every time you drive anywhere, at worst the car doesn't let you drive. You can't just dismiss this, it's going to happen more and more, and they will be increasingly hostile to your workarounds.

[–] autonomous@lemmy.world 5 points 6 hours ago

So disconnect the speaker and the noise should stop

[–] AfricanExpansionist@lemmy.ml 5 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

Break the camera? Remove it? Scratch the lens?

[–] xthexder@l.sw0.com 12 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

In a few years, this might brick your car. Have fun paying to have it towed to the dealership. User-caused damage isn't covered under warranty by the way.

.

.

Why does everything have to suck so much...

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 9 points 5 hours ago

Because the people making these laws aren't handled appropriately.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 9 hours ago (8 children)

You have to log your profile into your car?? Fuck everything about that!

[–] SirActionSack@aussie.zone 9 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

My car has profiles for seat position, mirror position, radio settings etc but it's just Driver 1 and Driver 2 and you select with a button.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] qaeta@lemmy.ca 21 points 9 hours ago

"what about the camera on your laptop?"

My personal laptop does not have a camera, and my work laptop has a physical camera blocker.

[–] ThunderQueen@lemmy.world 9 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

Some of these dorks out here would fr be supportive of a "smart" camera in their toilet looking straight at their hole/s. "I have nothing to hide, its just videos of me pooping"

[–] Vinylraupe@lemmy.zip 3 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

When the hole is opening an algorithm decides if its a fart/diarrhea/shit and adds the right amount of water to the bowl. Also the right amount of toilet paper rolls out.

When your session is over it ejects you from the toilet so we have maximum toiletefficiency.

People will call it toiletmaxxing.

[–] ThunderQueen@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago

I pictured it more like the system Rick had where it just analyzes his stool for abnormalities but that is way more accurate. And by the "correct" amount of tp, way too much, because its made by charmin

[–] Grass@sh.itjust.works 38 points 11 hours ago

anybody that doesn't think its an issue is an idiot

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 22 points 10 hours ago (3 children)

Wait till the 2027 gets the seat rectal probe to verify you by your large intestine. Also, they sell the data to health insurance providers.

[–] JillyB@beehaw.org 4 points 7 hours ago

Wait I thought we were talking about bad features...

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Trilogy3452@lemmy.world 65 points 13 hours ago

"Your insurance claim is denied, our algorithm says it's 70% confident your eyes were dilated in a way consistent with taking alcohol. Also, here's your court hearing date"

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 6 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

In many states any information not disclosed by the seller is grounds for you canceling the deal. But you would have to look that up for where you live. Or there's black tape, but then you're still paying for a camera you didn't want, aren't using, and weren't told about.

[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 8 points 9 hours ago

Fucking hell.

I'll be sticking with 2015 and older for as long as I can.

[–] AfricanExpansionist@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I'd just cover it or break it 🤷

[–] NihilsineNefas@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 hours ago

Void the warranty on a car that you paid 50,000 for, which was worth 30,000 by the time you drove it off the dealer's lot?

[–] scala@lemmy.ml 8 points 9 hours ago

Nope. Take it right back.

[–] Retro_unlimited@lemmy.world 26 points 11 hours ago

It will be used against you at every opportunity.

[–] Rolder@reddthat.com 27 points 12 hours ago (4 children)

That’d be getting covered immediately if it ended up in a car of mine

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] minorkeys@sh.itjust.works 17 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

It's to disempower you. All of this is to further disempower the masses.

[–] MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world -2 points 3 hours ago (3 children)

Everything is a global conspiracy to people like you.

[–] minorkeys@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 hour ago

With reasoning like that, I guess nothing is ever a conspiracy to people like you.

History very clearly shows the myriad ways the powerful enact 'conspiracy theory' agendas, regularly. To not include these learnings in your worldview is folly. Epstein is a giant 'conspiracy theory' that's sitting out in the open. The inaction to do anything about it is another one.

[–] TotalCourage007@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago

Yeah and the AI Power Grab mentioned by Bernie Sanders totally isn't happening right before our eyes.

[–] NihilsineNefas@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 hours ago

Never mind the surveillance state run by fascists who want nothing more than a neutered population that lets them do what they want.

Or the fact that the world is building data centers on behalf of techbros that openly state that they want to control the entire population through limiting their access to information and rendering it a subscription

Or the manipulation of public opinion through 24h news cycles and infinite pundits online that pick and choose their words very carefully to make people believe what the news station owners want them to think (and I quote) "He's telling them what to think. That's our job."/"This is very dangerous to our democracy."

Or the petrochemical companies paying billions to super pacs and lobbying groups so that anti pollution laws don't get pushed and the media circus doesn't talk about how many spills there are, or why our air is becomic toxic, or why the things that climate scientists have been warning the world about are coming true one after another.

It's aaaaallll just a "conspiracy theory"

Nothing to see. In the words of an amazon manager standing over a dying colleague instead of calling an ambulance "Lets not look, Get back to work"

load more comments
view more: next ›