https://lifehacker.com/tech/how-did-the-fbi-get-nancy-guthries-doorbell-footage Skip to Main Content Lifehacker Logo * View our Bluesky Page (Opens in a new tab) * View our Instagram Page (Opens in a new tab) * View on Facebook Page (Opens in a new tab) * View our Youtube Page (Opens in a new tab) * View our Twitter Page (Opens in a new tab) * Latest * Tech * Best Picks * Entertainment * Health * Reviews * Home & Garden * Deals * Comparisons * Hacks * #The Best Last-Minute Valentine Gifts Under $30 [ ] * Search Result ----------------------------------------------------------------- Latest Tech AI TVs Hardware Software Mobile Apps Privacy All Tech Best Picks Best VPN to Watch Porn Best Paid VPN Best Smartwatches Best Fitness Tracker Best E-Bikes Best Digital Notebooks Best Non-Kindle E-readers Best Cordless Power Tools Best Power Tools Best Laptops Best Laptops for College Students Best 65 Inch TV Best Budget QLED Best Android Phones Best Flashcard Apps Best Camera Apps iPhone All Best Picks Entertainment Wordle Connections Strands Streaming Gaming All Entertainment Health Fitness Training Diaries All Health Reviews Home & Garden Cleaning All Home & Garden Deals Comparisons Hacks #The Best Last-Minute Valentine Gifts Under $30 * * * * * Home Tech * * * * * * Copied How Did the FBI Get Nancy Guthrie's Nest Doorbell Footage? It's not entirely clear, but there are some likely leads. Jake Peterson Jake Peterson Senior Technology Editor Experience Jake Peterson is Lifehacker's Tech Editor, and has been covering tech news and how-tos for nearly a decade. His team covers all things technology, including AI, smartphones, computers, game consoles, and subscriptions. Areas of Expertise AI Android Apple Privacy Read Full Bio February 11, 2026 Add as a preferred source on Google Add as a preferred source on Google nest doorbell Credit: CC Photo Labs/Shutterstock Key Takeaways 1. The FBI was able to produce footage from Nancy Guthrie's Nest doorbell, even though authorities previously said it was disconnected. 2. FBI Director Kash Patel says the video was recovered "from residual data located in backend systems," but didn't share additional details. 3. It is possible that Guthrie's doorbell had saved videos or video data points from its event history, which the FBI could have used to piece together the full clips. Table of Contents Table of Contents --------------------------------------------------------------------- Like millions of Americans, I've been watching the news of Nancy Guthrie's disappearance with concern--so I was somewhat relieved when the FBI announced they were releasing new footage of a suspect. Finally, the case had something to go on, even if it was only doorbell video of a masked stranger. When I saw the footage, I assumed this was something the FBI had in their possession since the beginning, and had finally decided to release to the public. But that's not what happened at all. If you have been following this case closely, you may know that law enforcement had previously confirmed that Guthrie's Google Nest camera was disconnected (presumably by the perpetrator), and that she did not have a subscription that would store video either on the doorbell or in the cloud. Yet despite the fact the doorbell should have been a dead end, the FBI has seemingly produced this video out of thin air. If you have a Google Nest device in or attached to your home, this might give you pause. Sure, it's one thing if law enforcement is able to obtain video from your subscription or from the device itself. But if you don't keep video records on your Nest, it seems it is still possible to retrieve the footage. How did the FBI do this, and what does it mean for the privacy of your Nest devices? Lifehacker Logo You May Also Like The FBI likely pieced the video together from fragments The short answer is that we don't really know for sure how the FBI got the footage, but there are a few leads. According to FBI Director Kash Patel, the Google Nest footage was recovered "from residual data located in backend systems." That's pretty vague, though the FBI isn't necessarily known for its transparency[.] According to experts that spoke to NBC News, however, it is possible to obtain data from the "complex infrastructure" of cloud-based cameras, including Google Nest devices. Retired FBI agent Timothy Gallagher told NBC News that Guthrie's Nest camera might have sent images to Google's cloud service, or at least stored data points locally throughout the hardware of the device, even though she wasn't paying for a Nest subscription. The FBI could have obtained the footage from the cloud this way, or pieced together the video from those data points. Both possibilities track, based on how Nest cameras work without a subscription: While you need to pay Google in order to save video clips from your Nest cameras, some Nest devices record event histories and store them on-device. The third-gen wired Nest Doorbell can save up to 10 seconds of clips, while the first and second-gen wired doorbells can save up to three hours of event history, all without a subscription. They also support live video feeds when motion is detected, which could impact the video data points saved to the device or cloud. It's entirely possible the subject walking up to the camera triggered the doorbell to save an event history. But since it took the FBI so long to produce the footage, and since the director claims it was obtained from "residual data," my guess is it wasn't readily available in Guthrie's Google Home app. Maybe the event history saved to the cloud, but it wasn't clear where it was located. Maybe it was overwritten, but the FBI was able to build it back up with recovered data points. My guess would learn toward the latter, as authorities did say the camera had been disconnected. Unfortunately, we don't have a definitive answer at this time, even if the theory is sound. What do you think so far? I've reached out to Google for comment, and will update this piece if I hear back. Should you get rid of your Nest camera over privacy concerns? Based on what we know, it doesn't really seem like your Nest doorbell or camera is a fourth amendment disaster waiting to happen--but I don't blame anyone for being concerned. After all, if you don't have a Nest subscription, you might have been comforted by the thought that none of your footage was being saved anywhere, meaning law enforcement or other authorities would have nothing to seize if you somehow popped up on their radar. That doesn't necessarily appear to be the case. That said, without a subscription, you don't have access to a collection of all clips your Nest camera has ever recorded. You might have a limited event history saved, based on motion detection, but that will be limited to three hours of data. Your device might have data points that an organization like the FBI could theoretically use to restore footage, but that's likely true for any camera or smart doorbell system--not just Nest. Also, this is not a Ring situation--Google hasn't partnered with organizations like Flock to help law enforcement request footage from users. Nest also lacks Ring's "Search Party" feature, which can turn a neighborhood into a kind of surveillance state, and probably not just to search for lost dogs. I'm not dismissing every security and privacy concern, of course: By putting a commercially-available smart camera on your front door, you are placing your data in the hands of companies like Google or Amazon. If you want to eliminate the risk of the FBI obtaining your doorbell footage, you simply can't have a doorbell with a camera. But barring a warrant, or a Nancy Guthrie-level situation, the chances of your Nest doorbell footage actually being used against you seem rather slim. The Download Newsletter Never miss a tech story Get the latest tech news, reviews, and advice from Jake and the team. [ ] Subscribe to Lifehacker's Newsletter [ ] Loading... Sign Up Please complete the verification below to finish subscribing. Success! You're all signed up. Use this instead By clicking Sign Up, you confirm you are 16+ and agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. artist rendition of Jake Peterson Jake Peterson Senior Technology Editor Covering tech news, how-to guides, explainers, and more. Read Jake's full bio * More by Jake --------------------------------------------------------------------- Tech The Telegram App Has a New Look, and a Weird New Feature February 11, 2026 telegram app --------------------------------------------------------------------- Apple Apple Just Released iOS 26.3 With These New Features February 11, 2026 iphone update --------------------------------------------------------------------- * artist rendition of Jake Peterson Jake Peterson Senior Technology Editor Covering tech news, how-to guides, explainers, and more. Read Full Bio Latest --------------------------------------------------------------------- See More Tech The Telegram App Has a New Look, and a Weird New Feature February 11, 2026 telegram app --------------------------------------------------------------------- Tech TikTok's First US-Exclusive Feature Is a Local Feed That Wants Your Location Data February 11, 2026 TikTok Local Feed --------------------------------------------------------------------- Fitness How Deep Should You Squat? February 11, 2026 woman doing air squats --------------------------------------------------------------------- Lifehacker Logo Lifehacker has been a go-to source of tech help and life advice since 2005. Our mission is to offer reliable tech help and credible, practical, science-based life advice to help you live better. * Our Mission * Our Team * Newsletter * * * * * * Latest * Tech * Food * Entertainment * Health * Home & Garden * Relationships * Deals * Hacks * * #The Best Last-Minute Valentine Gifts Under $30 * About Ziff Davis (Opens in a new tab) * Privacy Policy * Terms of Use * Advertise * Accessibility * Do Not Sell My Personal Information (c) 2001-2026 Ziff Davis, LLC., A ZIFF DAVIS COMPANY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Lifehacker is a federally registered trademark of Ziff Davis and may not be used by third parties without explicit permission. The display of third-party trademarks and trade names on this site does not necessarily indicate any affiliation or the endorsement of Lifehacker. If you click an affiliate link and buy a product or service, we may be paid a fee by that merchant. * AdChoices Image AdChoices Image Pixel AdChoices * Better Business Bureau (BBB) Logo Better Business Bureau (BBB) Logo * TRUSTe Logo TRUSTe Logo Ziffmedia Logo CNET Logo ZDNET Logo PCMag Logo Mashable Logo Askmen Logo ExtremeTech Logo IGN Logo Speedtest Logo Keep Scrolling for Next Article [p]