The Ring has gotten a lot of critical press lately, with concerns among local police and federal law enforcement that it could access sensitive surveillance camera footage across the country. Anti-ICE activists are calling for a boycott when Ring announced it would partner with Flock Safety, which is building a nationwide surveillance network that police use to track license plates. And it’s not like any worries are really new. The ring has been dogged by privacy concerns for much of its existence, though there has been renewed interest in how surveillance technology is being used in 2026 as federal agents terrorize cities like Minneapolis, threatening anyone who isn’t white with deportation and killing street observers.

It is against this backdrop of bad PR that Ring, a subsidiary of Amazon, is expanding a feature that helps people find their lost dogs. And while the company is credited with helping to find almost one dog per day, an admirable achievement, no doubt celebrated by pet owners across the country, it comes at a time when every American is trying to weigh the pros and cons of covering the world with cameras that watch our every move.

“Ring expands Search Party for Dogs, an AI-powered community feature that lets your cameras outside of Ring help reunite lost dogs with their families, to anyone in the US who needs help finding their lost pup,” Amazon said in a press release posted online Monday.

the The Search Party feature allows Ring users to set up an alert to neighbors within the Ring ecosystem when their dog goes missing, similar to existing apps like PawBoost. And neighbors can choose to have their own camera to watch for any dog ​​that looks the same. The feature has been expanded to allow people who don’t have a Ring camera to download the app and post their lost dog as well.

Everyone can get behind the idea of ​​helping find lost dogs. But the segment feels like a PR move that draws attention away from the threat of omnipresent surveillance in a supposedly free society: the fact that every American device can be turned against them in an instant. If you don’t like it, well, maybe you like lost dogs.

Ring says that federal law enforcement has not been given access to features that allow authorities to request access to footage from Ring users. The company explained that local police must make a relatively narrow request for footage in a specific geographic area and a time-limited request within a 12-hour period. Police must also provide an investigation number and explain what type of crime they’re investigating, something users can look up on their own when they’re trying to decide whether to give their own footage to police. A Ring spokesperson told Gizmodo on Monday that they have not seen any immigration-related requests and that if the company finds a local police department secretly providing an agency like ICE with security footage, the department will cut off access.

“Ring has no partnership with ICE, does not provide ICE videos, feeds, or back-end access, and does not share video with them,” Ring spokeswoman Emma Daniels told Gizmodo in a statement.

But those safeguards may be cold comfort in a political environment where the US federal government doesn’t seem bound by any rules. A Minnesota judge recently found that ICE violated nearly 100 court orders in the state during January only.

Authorities can also obtain footage directly from Ring through a judicial warrant, and the company told Gizmodo that an administrative warrant isn’t enough.

“Like all companies, Ring may receive legally valid and binding demands for information from law enforcement, such as search warrants, subpoenas, or court orders,” Daniels said. “We do not disclose customer information unless required to do so by law, or in exceptional emergency situations when there is an imminent danger of death or serious physical harm. Outside of legal process, customers control which videos are shared with law enforcement.”

Judicial warrants are issued by real judges who are part of the judicial branch, as opposed to immigration “judges” who sit under the executive branch and the US Department of Justice. The distinction is important because administrative warrants are not sufficient to require entry into a private residence. However, the New York Times news broke last week that ICE told its agents that administrative warrants are enough to break into any home they want.

All of this is to say that when the rules are broken, it is important to pay attention to what private individuals and companies are doing in the face of oppression. Will Ring really pull the plug if ICE tries to abuse its power or gain access to footage through a local police department? We really don’t know. And while we’re all used to constant video thanks to a combination of state surveillance and private cameras, it makes sense that a company like Ring wants to highlight the positives of our global panopticon.

A positive? It’s easier to help your neighbors find Fido. Unfortunately, it also helps your neighbor search feeds.