Video Stream Encryption Between Camera And Server / User

There are some solutions on the market that propose encription of video stream between cameras and server / user. But do you think it is really vital for end users to have encryption? Does it have to be mandatory taking into account all these web access/mobile/cloud stuff? Why do we not have it now (price, resource consumption, delay due to encryption, something else)? Would you like to see it as a regular feature of products you use?

Why do we not have it now (price, resource consumption, delay due to encryption, something else)?

How does Facetime manage it?

  • End-to-end encryption
  • Free
  • Runs on mobile resources
  • Low latency
  • MP, h.264, RTP

It uses, let's say, enviroment i.e. relies on WPA2 Enterprise. I am talking more about situation when (for simplicity) we have a black box encrypting in camera and a black box decrypting on a client. Between them, for sure, it can be an access by a password, SSL, IEEE 802.1X, WPA2 Enterprise and so on but the video stream will be already encrypted.

Actually, Facetime uses an independent end-to-end encryption scheme which runs underneath the WPA2 endpoint encryption at each node.

Probably you are right. I did not study them in detail. Personally I do not like services that based on Apple/Microsoft etc. IDs. It is not really a private encryption. Anyway if there are no obstacles then why it is not on features lists of all products? I doubt that there is no business need in it.

Where is big business priority? DRM is all over the place so you can't even watch some content on particular devices, yet when it comes to user content, the options for securing your video content are quite limited.

It would make sense that an h-dot standard should incorporate options for content encryption. The horsepower is already there, and it's fairly likely that there could be some efficiency from integrated algorithms that compress and encrypt simultaneously.

This is that I am trying to find out whether customers / businesses need in an encryption of video streams for CCTV. Do they have serious privacy concerns regarding unauthorized access to their video streams? It is true for the case of biometric projects but for the CCTV?

Depends on the segment. Some will ask about it, others don't care.

It's a good practice in any IT system to SSL encrypt communications between systems. This is especially true outside a local LAN (across a WAN link). Towards that end I'd say most customers have an implicit assumption those links are secure.

But I've always argued that encrypted 'video' on the LAN has mostly diminishing returns. My logic being, if somebody has access to traffic on your LAN you have bigger problems than them eavesdropping on video. That is, the video itself tends to be low risk data (again, depending on the segment).

There are products that encrypt from camera to storage and client. It adds cost typically and more specifically it adds overhead in bandwidth and processing. Two that come to mind are Bosch and IndigoVision.

Would you like to see it as a regular feature of products you use?

What I am saying is that, IMHO, it is a regular feature of products used today, I was just using FaceTime as an example that most people have used.

But Dropcam, Arlo, and Smartcam also encrypts video.

As B mentioned several camera vendors offer options for encrypting.

If all else fails, VPN's can be encrypted also.

Are you asking about cloud video or local video? The demand I assume would be far less for LAN only video.