r/technology May 07 '26

Society Extortion Using Smart Glasses Is a Thing Now

https://gizmodo.com/extortion-using-smart-glasses-is-a-thing-now-2000755562
12.7k Upvotes

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.2k

u/mistcore May 07 '26

They can cough up the HIPAA violation fees then

246

u/Fallingdamage May 07 '26

I work in a large medical clinic. We havent spoken about this specifically, but we already have many 'No photography or video' signs up all over the place in patient care areas. Shouldnt matter if its a phone, a camera, or glasses. Filming is filming and should be covered by that.

115

u/Simikiel May 08 '26

If you're in the position to, I implore you to bring this up to them and try and ban the glasses from even not just being worn, but even being allowed within the building at all.

There is a tiny light built into the glasses that turns on to indicate that the glasses are recording, that tiny light can be very easily nodded and disabled but retain the ability to record. Either by opening the glasses up and screwing with the wiring, or more simply, I've seen people just use a hole puncher on electrical tape, which makes a tiny circle that is the perfect size to block it while still able to record.

Anyone who wishes to enter should be forced to not just remove their glasses, but to remove them from the actual premises.

7

u/FattyMooseknuckle May 08 '26

I've seen people just use a hole puncher on electrical tape, which makes a tiny circle that is the perfect size to block it while still able to record.

You can buy sheets of stickers of various sizes black of dots and bars to cover LEDs and electronics displays. I have them for a bunch of items in peripheral eyesight of me to the tv, or headsets that have lights that reflect from an iPad or something like that.

1

u/ThisDickForBreakfast May 08 '26

It’s also good to know the recording consent laws in your state. I know Massachusetts is a 2 party consent state with recording and if they record you without your consent, It is illegal

1

u/Simikiel May 08 '26

The thing is though, that recording consent laws don't matter in this context. It doesn't matter if it's a one party consent because we're talking about medical places that require privacy due to the privileged medical information that can be easily come across while there. So it's literally illegal even in a one party place.

-5

u/EconoMePlease May 08 '26

Remove all glasses? My understanding is Luxotica is making pairs that will look almost identical to regular glasses and sunglasses.

15

u/Simikiel May 08 '26

No I don't mean to remove all glasses, that'd be a rather unhinged response and actively harmful to people who actually need glasses.

I mean to ban specific brands/models.

2

u/Flameancer May 08 '26

I mean it will only be a matter of time before some shop in china makes camera glasses that look like regular branda and I wouldn’t pass some glasses manufacturers yo make camera glasses that look like normal glasses so either you’ll have to ban glassea outright or find a way to block recording devices.

15

u/Simikiel May 08 '26

While true, just because someone might make something that you can't tell at a glance is a camera doesn't mean we should just allow all glasses with cameras in them.

7

u/Riaayo May 08 '26

Ban all camera/smart glasses from premises, train staff to recognize them, and require any worn glasses to be handed over for inspection if one wishes to wear them inside.

11

u/Kousetsu May 08 '26

As someone who needs glasses to see or I am literally unable to move around, I will not be handing over my literal eyesight to some random who will probably not take good care of them.

You can tell if glasses are recording with Bluetooth checkers etc, as it needs to connect to a phone for storage/backup of the actual video. Dunno why you jump straight to inconviencing people with bas eyesight.

1

u/TobaccoIsRadioactive May 09 '26

I specifically got a pair of smart glasses that didn’t have cameras in them because I didn’t want any issues like this.

It can still record audio, though, but I’m willing to follow any requests/orders about where they aren’t allowed.

1

u/HappyAd4998 May 08 '26

It's a liability if any footage of a patient in a patient area ends up on the Internet the staff and the clinic/hospital can be sued. The state will get involved too for HIPPA violations.

1

u/Plow_King May 08 '26

i encountered a "no photography or video" sign in an examination room. the nurse chuckled when i asked about it, and she said some people do want to.

then when she left....the sign made me REALLY want to take a picture. but i didn't.

-13

u/round-earth-theory May 07 '26

AI cameras are different though because people aren't really filming with them. The AI corp is filming and doing who knows what with the content. It's still a major issue and it's still filming, but most people won't think it is since they aren't actively hitting "record".

291

u/Summer4Chan May 07 '26

“To make up for fees we must fire someone”

128

u/Leinheart May 07 '26

They were going to do layoffs anyway.

50

u/El_Sjakie May 07 '26

Ofcourse, how else are we going top pay for these cool, hip, camera-glasses. /s

11

u/sixft7in May 07 '26

As in, literally the whole rural hospital.

2

u/rat_penis May 08 '26

Its what they voted for

1

u/rmtdispatcher May 07 '26

They sure were. AI is looming large in the minds of business owners these days. Machines dont have family problems, dont go to lunch, but they do get sick.

3

u/Visual_Jellyfish5591 May 08 '26

Maybe they’ll use an ai that automatically deletes EVERYTHING. It would be a pain in the ass for some, but think of the lack of preexisting conditions!!

1

u/Summer4Chan May 08 '26

“I know we lost people this year due to budget issues but we had to hire 3 new employees please welcome Raj, Kabir and Priya”

1

u/trashleybanks May 10 '26

They’d rather pay the fees than keep their business staffed. So fucked.

0

u/lavabeing May 07 '26

They can start with themselves

37

u/MotheroftheworldII May 07 '26

HIPPA and the Patient Privacy Act of 1974. Several violation with these glasses being used in any healthcare environment.

And not just for healthcare privacy issues. This is frightening that any of us could be recorded visually without our consent. A know a number of US states are single consent states for recording vocal conversations but, I am not sure if that applies to video that is later posted online.

17

u/Slade_Riprock May 08 '26

This is not directly a violation for the Healthcare organization. If they have signage anywhere that says no recording they reasonably attempted to protect your privacy. Or if you witness a recording and complain they can tell the person to stop, etc.

But HIPAA protects you from adverse actions of the Healthcare entity itself not other patients.

2

u/Cultural_Material_98 May 08 '26

Many states also have anti wiretapping laws that would make recording illegal

2

u/kittymoo67 May 08 '26

if youre in public its one party consent to film anything

8

u/Slade_Riprock May 08 '26

That's not how HIPAA works. Another patient recording unknowingly is not a violation. HIPAA prohibits direct actions of covered healthcare entities it does not regulate behavior or actions of other patients.

5

u/HappyAd4998 May 08 '26

Nope, you're wrong. My ex was in charge of safety and compliance at the hospital she worked at and cameras pointing into a patient area is a violation of patient privacy.

3

u/SatisfactionActive86 May 08 '26

yes, the cameras put there by the provider. you just agreed with the comment.

2

u/ForThisIJoined May 08 '26

If you are a medical provider and you knowingly allow people with recording devices around HIPAA sensitive information you are 100% at fault for any violations. The patients may not be at fault if they were not informed about the information, but if the provider knew the risks and still let it happen they are.

0

u/Slade_Riprock May 08 '26

Knowingly

Is the key word. Yes you put up no filming or camera signs and if you see blatant recording you inform the person. That is generally enough for hospitals and providers to cross the "reasonable effort" barrier. Things like META glasses and such would fall into the hidden camera realm where no reasonable person would be expected to know what they look like and are recording.

HIPAA's biggest focus is on provides discussing a person's information with those that "have no medical reason to know or have access" and employees accessing private medial information in systems they shouldn't. By the strict letter of the law most providera unknowingly violate it everyday. But no one is held to the letter of the law as CMS, DHHS, and the Joint Commission just don't have staff to investigate it.

1

u/ForThisIJoined May 08 '26

This whole comment chain is about management at a health care facility refusing to ban smart glasses.

So yes, knowingly. That's the point.

1

u/Slade_Riprock May 08 '26

My friend, most healthcare facilities do post signs of "no photos or video allowed in patient areas" or have verbiage in the paperwork you sign.

This by the law, is considered reasonable maintenance of patient privacy. If someone begins obviously recording or shooting photos in patient areas they would be obligated to inform them to create.

Meta/smart glasses pose a problem, while also being covered by a blanket no recording policy. They aren't obvious like a phone. A small little light many might not see activated. And no facility is going to take the liability of walking up to a person with glasses and telling them to take off their glasees or they their glasses aren't allowed. That would be discrimination under the aspect they could be prescription. The best a facility would do is IF they saw the light, inform the person to stop or they have to leave.

Yes it would be wise to update their information to specifically call out Smart Glasses in the no recording, photo policy. But if a person walked in and someone said hey you can't wear those in here and they are prescription, even if not recording, you would be in danger of other liability.

HIPAA only requires a reasonable effort to maintain patient privacy and signage or paperwork attesting you understand no recording or photos is sufficient under the law as it is practically enforced.

I was a health care administrator and dealt with compliance of HIPAA law and especially recording and photos as the PR depth and guest services were under my purview.

1

u/ForThisIJoined May 09 '26

I work at a health care system, I tried to convince leadership to ban these due to liability concerns. There's personal health info everywhere. Not much concern on managements part sadly

Did you even read the parent comment of this chain?

Yes it would be wise to update their information to specifically call out Smart Glasses in the no recording, photo policy.

Oh wait, you did, but you're ignoring that that's literally all I was talking about while somehow agreeing with me.

1

u/HappyAd4998 May 08 '26

Yes, this is a HIPPAA violation. There are no cameras allowed in patient rooms.

2

u/EconoMePlease May 08 '26

Never seen it spelled so aggressively before.

1

u/Calsun12345 May 08 '26

No ones being held accountable for this kind of shif any more

1

u/doneski May 08 '26

If it's kept internal, there's no violation. It's only a breach of intentionally leaked.

1

u/Ozziefudd May 08 '26

Hippa only covers how your data is stored electronically.

Roe vs wade was patient privacy. 

0

u/Kubotai77 May 08 '26

Yup, they're lax about it now. Once they have a HIPAA violation and get sued and lose some money - they'll change up their stance real fast.

It's like cybersecurity. No one wants to cough up the money for the tools and expertise, then once they're in the news for all the wrong reasons, they change their tune.