The privacy loophole in your Ring doorbell
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/03/07/privacy-loophole-ring-doorbell-00084979Larkin had a Ring video doorbell, one of the more than 10 million Americans with the Amazon-owned product installed at their front doors. His doorbell was among 21 Ring cameras in and around his home and business, picking up footage of Larkin, neighbors, customers and anyone else near his house.
The police said they were conducting a drug-related investigation on a neighbor, and they wanted videos of “suspicious activity” between 5 and 7 p.m. one night in October. Larkin cooperated, and sent clips of a car that drove by his Ring camera more than 12 times in that time frame.
-snip-
This time, Larkin wasn’t able to choose which cameras he could send videos from. The warrant included all five of his outdoor cameras, and also added a sixth camera that was inside his house, as well as any videos from cameras associated with his account, which would include the cameras in his store. It would include footage recorded from cameras he had in his living room and bedroom, as well as the 13 cameras he had installed at his store associated with his account.
Larkin, now incensed that police were requesting footage from inside his home for an investigation that didn’t even involve him, wanted to fight the warrant. He estimated that a lawyer would have been too expensive, and he only had about seven days to challenge it before Ring would comply. He still doesn’t understand how a judge could have signed off on a warrant asking for footage from a camera inside his home, when the investigation was on his neighbor.
-snip-
Much more at the link.
= new reply since forum marked as read
How this relates to your post it that the home they bought was equipped with a 'Ring' system. Multi camera and listening devise set up. My wife and I toured the home multiple times with them and came to find out that the homeowners were listening and filming us the whole time we were there. No doubt catching my oft to direct, even crunchy comments about the house.
We would never have known if the kids realtor had not informed us that there is a possibility of this. This should absolutely be illegal.
Drip, drip, drip.
While there are advantages to wired systems (not having to constantly charge batteries for example, security of the video feed really isn't one of them. WiFi can be jammed though, effectively taking your cameras off line.
WiFI encryption is pretty good on its own, and someone would need to be within range anyway. Then the cameras use their own encryption as well.
So your options for local control are to store the images inside the camera itself (some offer up to 16 GB of internal storage), or you can use a hub/DVR to keep the recordings.
Then someone would need to hack into your local storage device - which is where a large weakness resides. A lot of these cheaper "made in china" devices have built in backdoors a hacker can use to get access. That is a much bigger issue then someone sniffing your wifi traffic.
RTSP is a common protocol supported by some cameras which will allow you to download videos to a DVR. It is a science project to build out though.
Like I said, this is a very tangled knot of measures and countermeasures.
The easiest way if to buy a camera/dvr system from one vendor like lorex (there are a lot of them). They come in various IP and non-IP modes. If you get an IP camera system with power over etheernet (PoE), it will be hardwired and you only have to pull one cable to each camera. But you will need a compatible PoE network switch.
This is enough to go luddite. Good luck with whatever you go with. It will likely be out of date and unsupported in a couple of years no matter whatyou choose. 
.
