The proliferation of affordable, high-definition, and internet-connected home security cameras (e.g., Ring, Nest, Arlo) has transformed residential safety. While these devices offer genuine benefits in theft deterrence, package delivery monitoring, and emergency response, they simultaneously introduce unprecedented privacy risks. This paper examines the dual-use nature of these systems. It analyzes the erosion of third-party privacy (neighbors, delivery personnel, passersby), the vulnerabilities of cloud storage and data breaches, and the normalization of surveillance culture. The paper concludes by proposing a balanced framework of technical design, legal regulation, and user ethics to mitigate privacy harms without eliminating security gains.

: Capturing a neighbor’s balcony or front door without consent can lead to legal disputes or strained relationships. 2. Legal Frameworks (India Context)

: Established as a Fundamental Right under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, ensuring all surveillance is justified by a legitimate security purpose.

Several cities have begun legislating. For example:

: You have a legal right to monitor your own property, including driveways, front yards, and entry points. You can also record public spaces visible from your property, like streets and sidewalks. Strictly Prohibited