I think most of the people talking about how it makes you more recognizable don't understand how security cameras actually work. Most of the time, nobody is actually watching the camera. It's there to have a recording of any incident after it happens.
The IR hats that were going around the internet 10 years ago, and this modern version (in a hoodie) are about defeating that security model. The wearer's face becomes completely unrecognizable in recordings, and the wearer has plausible deniability about being at the location if questioned after the fact.
When security personnel are actively watching the cameras, like at a high-security facility, this makes you stand out. But if you're at a convenience store, it completely defeats their camera recordings.
> But if you're at a convenience store, it completely defeats their camera recordings.
Not if the camera has an IR-cut filter. And don't security camera feeds frequently get displayed to employees behind the counter (contrary to your assertion that nobody is watching)?
A quick search for "IR cut security camera" on Amazon returns hundreds of results. Some cost as little as $20 [1], so not uncommon at all from what I can tell.
> Even for those that do, IR filters are rarely perfect, so a bright enough IR light would still do the trick.
Do you have a source for this? I've never tested it, so I can't say, but I would want to want to see some proof first.
> A quick search for "IR cut security camera" on Amazon returns hundreds of results. Some cost as little as $20 [1], so not uncommon at all from what I can tell.
That's the very opposite. That's a camera that uses IR illumination to record at night. That's what all those LEDs around the lens are for. And due to this it lacks any IR filtering. This particular camera is more IR sensitive than most cameras like DSLRs or cell phones.
> Do you have a source for this? I've never tested it, so I can't say, but I would want to want to see some proof first.
You can test it by pointing a remote at a camera. Normal cameras like cell phones and DSLRs have IR filters. They still can see the blinking LED on an IR remote, because the filter isn't perfect.
> That's the very opposite. That's a camera that uses IR illumination to record at night. That's what all those LEDs around the lens are for. And due to this it lacks any IR filtering. This particular camera is more IR sensitive than most cameras like DSLRs or cell phones.
No, the camera also has IR cut - it lists the feature right in the product title, and the customer-provided samples in the reviews clearly have an IR cut filter applied (you can tell by the "natural" colors in the daytime photos). Is has two modes of operation, daytime mode and nighttime mode. During daytime mode it employs an IR cut filter, and during nighttime mode it removes the filter and adds additional IR lighting for "night vision".
> They still can see the blinking LED on an IR remote, because the filter isn't perfect.
Being able to see a faint blinking LED from a remote is not sufficient to prove that the effect is strong enough to completely obscure a person's face when an IR cut filter is applied, in my opinion.
> During daytime mode it employs an IR cut filter, and during nighttime mode it removes the filter and adds additional IR lighting for "night vision".
Ah, I see
> Being able to see a faint blinking LED from a remote is not sufficient to prove that the effect is strong enough to completely obscure a person's face when an IR cut filter is applied, in my opinion.
It's just a matter of intensity. An IR filter is going to block some percentage. If it blocks 90%, you just need a 10X stronger light. At some point this gets impractical of course, but you can buy some really powerful LEDs. Most security cameras are cheap and the IR filter is there to improve the image in the daytime, not to counteract intentional attacks.
If I'm working at a convenience store, and I notice that someone walked in wearing a camera jamming device, I am going to be pretty suspicious. Almost as suspicious as if they came in wearing a ski mask. Not sure what I'd do about it, but I would definitely give a fuck.
Having worked retail I can tell you the video feed is interesting for all of about 10 minutes. After that, there is a job to do. The only time it gets looked at is if a hot girl or some sketchy AF walks into the store and down tall isles. In practical terms, no one is watching the camera feed after their first day on the job.
Almost every camera has an IR filter and can still see high-intensity IR light. Point your phone camera at a TV remote and you can see this. That camera has a strong IR filter, but the little LED in the remote overwhelms it still.
The IR hats that were going around the internet 10 years ago, and this modern version (in a hoodie) are about defeating that security model. The wearer's face becomes completely unrecognizable in recordings, and the wearer has plausible deniability about being at the location if questioned after the fact.
When security personnel are actively watching the cameras, like at a high-security facility, this makes you stand out. But if you're at a convenience store, it completely defeats their camera recordings.