Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

1,600 Korean Hotel Guests Were Secretly Filmed and Live-Streamed Online (cnn.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the creepy-is-an-understatement dept.

dryriver shares a report from CNN: About 1,600 people have been secretly filmed in hotel rooms in South Korea, with the footage live-streamed online for paying customers to watch, police said Wednesday. Two men have been arrested and another pair investigated in connection with the scandal, which involved 42 rooms in 30 accommodations in 10 cities around the country. Police said there was no indication the businesses were complicit in the scheme. Cameras were hidden inside digital TV boxes, wall sockets and hairdryer holders and the footage was streamed online, the Cyber Investigation Department at the National Police Agency said in a statement. The streaming site had more than 4,000 members, 97 of whom paid a $44.95 monthly fee to access extra features, such as the ability to replay certain live streams. The site had more than 4,000 members, 97 of whom paid a $44.95 monthly fee to access extra features, such as the ability to replay certain live streams. Between November 2018 and this month, police said, the service brought in upward of $6,000.

16 of 103 comments (clear)

  1. The streaming site had more than 4,000 members... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    The streaming site had more than 4,000 members, 97 of whom paid a $44.95 monthly fee to access extra features, such as the ability to replay certain live streams. The site had more than 4,000 members, 97 of whom paid a $44.95 monthly fee to access extra features, such as the ability to replay certain live streams. The streaming site had more than 4,000 members, 97 of whom paid a $44.95 monthly fee to access extra features, such as the ability to replay certain live streams. The site had more than 4,000 members, 97 of whom paid a $44.95 monthly fee to access extra features, such as the ability to replay certain live streams.

    The streaming site had more than 4,000 members, 97 of whom paid a $44.95 monthly fee to access extra features, such as the ability to replay certain live streams. The site had more than 4,000 members, 97 of whom paid a $44.95 monthly fee to access extra features, such as the ability to replay certain live streams.

  2. Imagine paying for a live stream... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...only to find some business suit clad paper pusher with thick glasses sitting at a desk in the room processing legal documents all night.

    1. Re:Imagine paying for a live stream... by bobstreo · · Score: 4, Funny

      ...only to find some business suit clad paper pusher with thick glasses sitting at a desk in the room processing legal documents all night.

      Rule 34

  3. Caveat emtpor by Freischutz · · Score: 4, Funny

    About 1,600 people have been secretly filmed in hotel rooms in South Korea, with the footage live-streamed online for paying customers to watch, police said Wednesday

    This is why I always run around my hotel room wearing a full body Sasquatch suit.

    1. Re: Caveat emtpor by Pascoea · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seriously What the hell, just check your surroundings and you should be able to figure out if you're being watched most of the time pretty quick.

      Yeah, no. I've sold/installed cameras for legitimate businesses. It's not hard at all to hide cameras that you won't find unless you start taking devices apart. Smoke detectors come to mind as a quick way to go about it. Anything that already has power running to it is a great target.

      Who would pay for these random videos anyway?

      This is the biggest tragedy, these dumbasses are getting busted for $6000. They only got less than 1% to sign up? That's a horrible effort.

      I bet it's mostly really long hugs.

      Yeah. For the most part it's going to be pretty boring. But I know what I've done in hotel rooms... I'm the only one, and I can't believe I'm the most "adventurous" one either. There's a lot of voyeurs out there that would pay good money for this kind of crap.

  4. Links by Teun · · Score: 3, Funny

    Pleas links to the streams or it didn't happen :)

    --
    "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    1. Re:Links by null+etc. · · Score: 2

      Pleas links to the streams or it didn't happen :)

      That will be $44.95, please.

  5. Re:So let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Slashdot obviously signed up for the replay feature.

  6. Slashdot can't afford editors who can read by gavron · · Score: 2

    > The streaming site had more than 4,000 members, 97 of whom paid a $44.95 monthly fee to access extra features, such as the ability to replay certain live streams. The site had more than 4,000 members, 97 of whom paid a $44.95 monthly fee to access extra features, such as the ability to replay certain live streams

    Can you repeat this again?

    Slashdot, once you were great. Now you can't afford editors who read. What's next, removing users who read? Oh wait, that's already there. 2000 comments on posts indicate "I can't be bothered to read anyone else's comment. Nobody else would have the insight I do. Let me just post my opinion because my insight is so important."

    Time to hire editors that read... or CLOSE UP SHOP.

    E

    1. Re:Slashdot can't afford editors who can read by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Had the editors been able to read, they could have mentioned that the streaming site had more than 4,000 members, 97 of whom paid a $44.95 monthly fee to access extra features, such as the ability to replay certain live streams.

  7. Looking for cameras by coofercat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Does this mean we should look for cameras in our hotel rooms, or trust that the hotel owner did it for us already? How do you actually find such cameras?

    Absolutely seriously, how could you check into a hotel room and have any confidence it has no cameras in it? Even if you look for them, and even if you find a couple, how would you know you've got them all? I guess if I found one, I'd probably check out immediately in a huff, but then maybe just right into another hotel room that had better hidden cameras.

    This isn't really anything new, but I guess the prevalence of 'spy cameras' on Amazon/ebay mean that the last people in the room might have bugged it for whomever comes in next. That's a little different from the room being bugged specifically for errant would-be presidents or whatever.

    1. Re:Looking for cameras by Whorhay · · Score: 4, Informative

      You can look for the shine of the CCD using a camera that can see in the IR spectrum and a bright directional IR light. Pan the camera and IR light around together in any suspect areas. Any bright reflective spots should get close scrutiny, especially if they are pin points on an otherwise non-reflective surface.

    2. Re:Looking for cameras by Whorhay · · Score: 2

      From what I understand it is actually the CCD that is reflecting the IR. If there is an IR filter on the camera then you would probably get a reflection off of that unless it is actually completely absorbing the IR. If the filter is in front of the lens it might not stand out against the background but it would probably still look different to some degree. That said it is very unlikely that you'd find a camera that is being used for voyeurism with an IR filter since that would mean it couldn't be setup for effective use in the dark. Most digital cameras that I have ever seen worked in the infrared to some degree and the CCD is not going to be perfectly black and so reflect IR back through the lenses. You can actually test this with whatever random digital camera you have available, point a typical IR TV remote control at the lens and press some buttons. You should be able to see some flashes of light in the camera picture. The IR reflected through a lens looks distinctly different than a reflection off of pretty much anything else. If you've ever seen an animals eyes reflecting back at you from the dark you'll have an idea of what I'm talking about.

  8. Re:Seems like a lot of effort and risk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    If they have 97 members paying $44.95 a month, ...

    Where did you get those numbers? I didn't see them anywhere in the summary.

  9. The logical next step... by gachunt · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hotels should install cameras in each room with round-the-clock monitoring, so they can ensure no one installs any cameras in their rooms.

    1. Re:The logical next step... by Wulf2k · · Score: 2

      You can say that again.