I don't see how this provides real security. So data localization aka data residency is a requirement that data (including video) must be stored in the country it is created (so US in US, PRC in PRC, UK in UK, etc., etc.).
If Hikvision says they store US video in the US or USvision (made up hypothetical since PRC blocks foreign providers) says they store PRC video in the PRC, how does that actually matter? If Hikvision or this imaginary USvision want to spy or share video, they can still easily do it regardless of where the video / data is ostensibly stored. How would one prove these companies are actually exporting video back vs normal data transfers to update servers, software, maintenance, etc.?
******* ** ****** *** ***** ****** technical ******** ******* ** ******* ******?
* ***** ** *** ** ** with *** **** ********** ** ***** the **** **. ** ***** ** a ******* ******* *** *** ***** is ** *****, ** ** ****** to ***** *** **** ** *** US. ** *** ***** ** ** the **, **** ***** ** ****** to ***** *** ***** ****. *** it ******** ** **** ** * warm *** ***** ** **** *** feel ******.
* ******* **** ***** **** ***** requirements.
"**** ************ *** ** ********** ******** by *** ** ** *** ****** of ***** *********** ******** **** **** it ********** ** ******** ****. **** require ********* ** ***** * **** of *** **** *******, ******* **** locally *** ******* ********** ** ********** consent *** **** *********."
** ***** ** ****** *** * country ** ***** ****/******* ***/** *** on ** ** ** ** ** the *******.**** ********* **** ** *******: ** overview - *********