I’ve used several indoor security camera brands, but currently only recommend one

Using indoor, connected security cameras is a touch-and-go subject for many homeowners. It seems we readily accept the concept of perpetual eyes on the outside of our homes, but bringing those eyes to the unseen, the inside, gives us pause. There’s just something about that never-blinking lens gaping at you forever — but more than that, it’s knowing that more and more camera brands we’ve trusted are falling into bad graces with security scandals and lax protection of user data.

Some don’t see much of a reason for indoor cameras; others like an indoor camera around for checking in on pets during the day, or purpose them as baby monitors. For people who travel a lot, an indoor camera is a great way to check in on your home while you’re away. But whatever you use it for, you should be able to feel confident that your cameras aren’t exposing you to uninvited eyes. In light of that, I think the Essential Indoor Camera, with its automatic privacy shutter and Arlo’s notable lack of big security breaches, is the easiest indoor security cam to recommend right now.

Some camera brands are struggling to keep our trust

I’d use some of these brands outside, but wouldn’t invite them in

Imagine you install a new camera-enabled security device on your home, like a video doorbell. Days later, you receive an email containing a screenshot of yourself. Waving at the camera. The camera you just installed on your home.

This cautionary tale of cyber insecurity isn’t a work of fiction. While this instance involved an expected internal test of the video doorbell’s security by Consumer Reports staff, the implications are unsettling, but not entirely surprising. You can buy security cameras through sites known for pushing junk electronics from unknown brands, like Temu and Shein, after all. Not all home security brands are created equal, and it’s disturbing as a technology professional to watch some consumers cash in their shopping discernment for a mega-cheap electronic. Especially one tasked with monitoring their home.

But the bloated Temu and Shein shopping sites are not the only guilty parties; Amazon itself is brimming with unvetted electronics, often spat out by the same couple manufacturers, just with new versions of an alphabet soup name for Amazon-necessary trademark purposes. CR’s report puts the pressure on one certain home security brand, Eken, but there are dozens if not hundreds more of similar products and brands that have little to no reputation for user privacy and data security.

It’s the brands you know and trust, too

Weak protection of user data where you least expect it

You’d think the risk would stop when opting for a well-known brand with an established security reputation, right? Absolutely not — just look at Wyze, a security brand we fawned over for years for its cameras that severely undercut competition with their compelling feature-to-price ratio.

Back in February, Wyze fumbled and let 13,000 users see security notifications from cameras belonging to other users, resulting in some cases of users seeing thumbnails and entire videos of other people’s houses. This breach comes after Wyze users found out that a security vulnerability meant that strangers could’ve been watching their live feeds all along, a vulnerability that took years to fix.

Let’s look at another. Eufy, a smart home brand under the Anker umbrella, once touted its commitment to user privacy through the use of end-to-end encryption. Those claims crumbled when a security researcher discovered he could access Eufy camera feeds through an unsecured web portal.

At one point, the call was coming from inside the house with Amazon’s Ring, which the Federal Trade Commission found to be illegally allowing Ring employees to tune into users’ private video feeds. Sickos.

I’ve used a half-dozen indoor cameras

But I only recommend Arlo’s for this one unique feature

Looking through years of Arlo user forums, you’ll find a handful of people reporting that a hack has occurred. Many of them look to be an issue of poor password security, something many of us who use the same password for everything have learned our lesson on over the years.

But there hasn’t been a widespread Arlo data breach event, not something of great enough scale to garner press attention and widespread consumer banishment of the brand, either temporarily or permanently. This doesn’t mean that Arlo’s security is foolproof — wireless, Wi-Fi and cloud-based cameras could never make that claim — but it means that the brand’s reputation is currently a whole lot cleaner than many of its competitors’.

Despite being someone who perpetually has no less than a couple (but sometimes up to four or five) cameras installed in and around the home for product review purposes, I don’t have strong opinions on having an indoor camera. I don’t have a baby to monitor, I don’t do much extended traveling, and I don’t need to check in on my cats to know they’re doing little else besides loitering on the couch or beating each other up.

However, if I were to recommend an indoor camera right now to average shoppers who don’t want to dive into complex security components like Ethernet-based monitoring or NAS video storage, it would be Arlo’s Essential Indoor Camera.

It’s not because Arlo (like Eufy once did) claims to offer double-encrypted security of its cloud storage — it does and so far there haven’t been any weaknesses exposed in that. It’s because Arlo included a privacy shutter on the Essential Indoor Camera that slides shut over the lens when the camera is disarmed.

For members of the home and guests, this shutter provides a nice oh, I’m not currently being watched peace of mind. And then, if you do want someone to know the camera is on and seeing them, the shutter opens with a loud, decisive snap.

Showing users you value their privacy is important

So thank you, Arlo

While some indoor cameras have a software-based privacy mode, we don’t see this physical barrier preventing an audience on most other indoor cameras — not from TP-Link, Ring, Blink, Wyze, or Ecobee, just to name some of the well-known competitors. The only other camera from an established brand with this feature is the GE Cync Smart Indoor Security Camera.

If Arlo (or any other indoor security camera brands) is open to suggestions for future indoor camera models, a helmet-visor-type shield that hinges down over the lens, and is only controlled by someone physically doing so with no possibility for remote opening or closing whatsoever, would be an even better addition. Admittedly this could be a risk if someone breaks in and can simply pull the visor down over the lens, but maybe it could be easily removable to take off when you’re away. It would calm the slight worry I have about someone somehow remotely powering on the device and remotely opening the shutter — all that work just to see my cats practicing their WWE reenactments.

Of course, nothing will be as safe as just putting an opaque cup over your indoor cams when you’re home. Or unplugging them. Or… never installing indoor cameras in the first place. And yes, there are more expensive, labor-intensive ways of locking down your home security network. But not everyone has the technical know-how to achieve this, and simple solutions go a long way. Even if it’s only psychology behind the appeal of Arlo’s privacy shutter inclusion on their indoor camera, the nod to our personal security speaks volumes as consumers and our data become more and more commodified, both through legitimate and shady channels.