I had the same concerns, particularly since I bought the 980 with the camera on it. I ended up creating an access point with my phone to set it up, and now I have an old beaten phone as controller for it that has the same access point but no internet. Getting to that point was a pain, and the reason why I'm currently convinced that this will be my last iRobot.

My concerns aren't about what the Roomba would do to other devices on my network, but what kind of data it's sending out and how that data could be used. That can't be mitigated by just having the thing connect to a separate network.

I'd rather not have a 3rd party have floor-plans of my house and continuously images of every inch of my home. I'd rather all of that data stay local to a device that I own and control.

My take on their comment was that they do have a separate wifi connection that is just their phone, vacuum device and an access point with no internet on any of them that is physically separate from the rest of their network.

I'm with you though. No way would I EVER get anything like that that connected to the internet. I can't think of any benefits that would remotely come close to justifying that behavior.

Even if it meant insurance would drop to $0, one "leak" and anyone with a bit of resources can get a nice up to date map of your house, when you're around, what lights are on, when their on, etc. It would be much worse than that site that scarfed social media and documented when people were on vacation, left the house or whatever.

> I'm with you though. No way would I EVER get anything like that that connected to the internet. I can't think of any benefits that would remotely come close to justifying that behavior.

Next up: it'll just connect to 4G. I hope that doesn't happen, but it just seems all too likely.

Im hoping not, since it's more expensive in manufacturing, and people who go through the trouble of not having their Roomba on the internet are more edge cases than normal customers. Plus consumer watchdogs and privacy groups will start to get on your nerves.

I believe the grandparent comment said he cut off internet access for it and the old phone he uses to control it. It sounds like it works on a strictly LAN connection unhindered.

It does sound like a lot of trouble for a vacuum cleaner, though.

I mean, how clean do people need their floors to be? I vacuum like once every couple weeks and it’s not like I’m getting sick or my floors look gross.

What type of floor do you have?

Carpets I've had could go months without noticing anything, but the amount of dust bunnies and random crap of unknown origin that got stuck to my feet shocked me the first place I got with a hardwood floor.

We have ours run three times a week due to the amount of dust and dirt our two dogs track into the house. And even then the floor doesn't look pristine.

The phone opening the access point for the router doesn't have a SIM card, and is just there to provide a WiFi connection for the Roomba to be able to control it. That way, the vacuum can't access the internet but I can still control it.

> That way, the vacuum can't access the internet but I can still control it.

Interesting! The camera functionality still works without an internet connection? I'd always assumed that some of the processing was getting offloaded to the "cloud," since I couldn't see another reasonable need for the wifi connection.

I want a lighted camera on the inside to see what it's vacuumed up!

> That feels a lot safer.

In what way?

Probably the same risks as with any IoT device. Any device is dangerous to some extent if it:

(1) has internet connectivity,

(2) has poor security (due to bad design/implementation and/or lack of updates), and

(3) is on your internal network.

It may not be a valuable target itself, but it can serve as a beachhead to launch further attacks on other devices on the same network. Assuming you rely on some firewall-style network security (a notion of inside and outside), which most people do.

So basically, it's dangerous in the same way that laptops, cell phones, tablets, video game consoles, security cameras, ebook readers, and printers are all dangerous?

It's the same type of risk, but the degree of risk varies.

Laptops run operating systems written by and supported by software companies. Because software is one of their core competencies, they are more likely to understand vulnerabilities and release updates to patch them in a timely manner. And they are more likely to continue releasing updates for years.

IoT devices (security cameras, etc.) are usually made by companies whose core competency is hardware. They tend to think in terms of making money by selling hardware, and the software may be viewed as overhead and of secondary importance. You are lucky to get any updates at all, and updates tend to cease long before the hardware stops working.

I also think there's a higher chance of smaller IoT device makers selling your data to third parties. On the flip side you could probably add in any device from Alphabet companies to collecting, analyzing and selling that data.

My guess would be no way for outsiders to access the camera.