Saturday, May 09, 2026

Beware: Smart Glasses Are the New Tool for Extortion

One woman was recently told to pay up if she wanted clandestine footage removed from social media.

More

Extortion Using Smart Glasses Is a Thing Now https://gizmodo.com/extortion-using-smart-glasses-is-a-thing-now-2000755562

[image or embed]

-- Gizmodo (@gizmodo.com) May 7, 2026 at 10:25 AM

Comments

More from the article ...

... When the woman contacted the account owner to request the video's removal, he replied that taking it down was a "paid service." She refused to pay and reported the matter to the police. The social media platforms removed the clip and banned at least one account, but whatever goes on the internet stays on the internet; copies and reposts of the footage kept appearing on other profiles.

Smart glasses with built-in cameras make abuse like this easier because they look like ordinary eyewear and record discreetly. Some models have a recording indicator, but such a tiny light can be easy to miss. Some users even try to hide the light by covering it up. ...



#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-05-09 12:55 AM

Mask up, everyone

#2 | Posted by hamburglar at 2026-05-09 07:40 PM

Apple, it is rumored, is about to come out with such devices...hope the recording indicator is large and obvious.

#3 | Posted by Hughmass at 2026-05-10 07:25 AM

The law says you have no reasonable expectation in public areas.

#4 | Posted by Miranda7 at 2026-05-10 09:37 AM

Stop the minimalistic framing.

Patriot Act - even our in-home privacy has been compromised.

#5 | Posted by fresno500 at 2026-05-10 10:08 AM

Footage doing what?

There's a pretty simple strategy I follow, I just don't do things which I would be embarrassed about.

#6 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-05-10 11:13 AM

#6 "...I just don't do things which I would be embarrassed about."

Betrayed each and every time onepigironheaded clicks on the Publish Comment button.

#7 | Posted by A_Friend at 2026-05-10 11:27 AM

Recording indicators? How quaint. Hackers have figured out how to disable them with software workarounds ages ago.

#8 | Posted by sentinel at 2026-05-10 11:53 AM

You'd have to be stupid to wear them in the first place.

#9 | Posted by Yodagirl at 2026-05-10 02:22 PM

Hackers have figured out how to disable them with software workarounds ages ago.

#8 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

They use that "high tech" Tape.

#10 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-05-10 02:26 PM

#5 Not sure why your panties are bunched up Fresno, I wasn't minimizing anything, just stating a fact. Recording another person in a public place is not illegal, because there is no reasonable expectation of privacy.

It has nothing to do with the Patriot Act. In the U.S. it would be covered in detail under Title Iii, which goes back decades, but this happened in England, where they have similar laws concerning expectation of privacy.

#11 | Posted by Miranda7 at 2026-05-10 09:25 PM

@#11 ... Recording another person in a public place is not illegal, because there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. ...

I do not disagree.

But then, I will also add, how that recording is used may present issues that our current law has not yet caught up with.

As another example, look at the FLOCK cameras that are being installed. When our current law was enacted, were things like FLOCK cameras imagined?

Welcome to DeFlock
https://deflock.org/
An open-source project mapping license plate readers.

...


...



#12 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-05-10 09:40 PM

States react to FLOCK?

New CT law bars police from sharing license plate data for immigration enforcement
www.ctinsider.com

... The legislation follows a CT Insider investigation that found Connecticut police departments using cameras from Atlanta-based company Flock Safety were sharing data to a "national network" that allowed out-of-state agencies to access their data. The data was searched thousands of times by out-of-state agencies for "ICE," "ICE-assist" and "immigration" purposes, the reporting found. ...


#13 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-05-10 09:44 PM

@#12

Did you know that the cameras provide that level of monitoring?

And feeding into the database?


#14 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-05-11 01:33 AM

I don't disagree with you either. The legislature is way, way behind the 8 ball on this.

#15 | Posted by Miranda7 at 2026-05-11 07:20 AM

I hear there's about $150 worth of silver in those Flock Cameras... Spread the word

#16 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2026-05-11 08:46 PM

Drudge Retort Headlines

700k Kids Lose Food Aid (101 comments)

Ken Paxton Wins Texas Runoff Election for Senate Seat (31 comments)

Trump DOJ Launches Criminal Probe Into E. Jean Carroll: Sources (27 comments)

Meta says Goodbye to Those Who Won't Use AI (21 comments)

Scott Bessent Wants to Put Trump on $250 Bill (19 comments)

US Revises 1st Quarter Growth Down While Inflation Climbs (14 comments)

Trump Threatens to Blow Up Oman (13 comments)

Why Trump isn't Bothering to Hide his Corruption (13 comments)

Democratic Attorneys General Snub Vance's anti-Fraud Roundtable (11 comments)

Poll: Trump Supporters Reject His Anti-Weaponization Fund (9 comments)