jm + cctv   6

Artificial intelligence is going to supercharge surveillance - The Verge
What happens when governments can track huge numbers of people using CCTV? When police can digitally tail you around a city just by uploading your mugshot into a database?


Or, indeed, when CCTV combined with AI and big data is routinely tracking everybody all the time?
ai  surveillance  privacy  cctv  big-data  government  big-brother  anpr 
february 2018 by jm
Ireland goes Big Brother as police upgrade snooping abilities - The Register
The Garda Síochána has proposed to expand its surveillance on Irish citizens by swelling the amount of data it collects on them through an increase in its CCTV and ANPR set-ups, and will also introduce facial and body-in-a-crowd biometrics technologies. [...] The use of Automated Facial Recognition (AFR) technology is fairly troubled in the UK, with the independent biometrics commissioner warning the government that it was risking inviting a legal challenge back in March. It is no less of an issue in Ireland, where the Data Protection Commissioner (DPC) audited Facebook in 2011 and 2012, and scolded the Zuckerborg over its use of facial recognition technology.
afr  facial-recognition  minority-report  surveillance  ireland  gardai  cctv  anpr  biometrics  privacy 
june 2016 by jm
Did you know that Dublin Airport is recording your phone's data? - Newstalk
Ugh. Queue tracking using secret MAC address tracking in Dublin Airport:
"I think the fundamental issue is one of consent. Dublin Airport have been tracking individual MAC addresses since 2012 and there doesn't appear to be anywhere in the airport where they warn passengers that this is this occurring. "If they have to signpost CCTV, then mobile phone tracking should at a very minimum be sign-posted for passengers," he continues.


And how long are MAC addresses retained for, I wonder?
mac-addresses  dublin-airport  travel  privacy  surveillance  tracking  wifi  phones  cctv  consent 
november 2015 by jm
Red lines and no-go zones - the coming surveillance debate
The Anderson Report to the House of Lords in the UK on RIPA introduces a concept of a "red line":
"Firm limits must also be written into the law: not merely safeguards, but red lines that may not be crossed." …   
"Some might find comfort in a world in which our every interaction and movement could be recorded, viewed in real time and indefinitely retained for possible future use by the authorities. Crime fighting, security, safety or public health justifications are never hard to find." [13.19] 

The Report then gives examples, such as a perpetual video feed from every room in every house, the police undertaking to view the record only on receipt of a complaint; blanket drone-based surveillance; licensed service providers, required as a condition of the licence to retain within the jurisdiction a complete plain-text version of every communication to be made available to the authorities on request; a constant data feed from vehicles, domestic appliances and health-monitoring personal devices; fitting of facial recognition software to every CCTV camera and the insertion of a location-tracking chip under every individual's skin.

It goes on:
"The impact of such powers on the innocent could be mitigated by the usual apparatus of safeguards, regulators and Codes of Practice. But a country constructed on such a basis would surely be intolerable to many of its inhabitants. A state that enjoyed all those powers would be truly totalitarian, even if the authorities had the best interests of its people at heart." [13.20] …  

"The crucial objection is that of principle. Such a society would have gone beyond Bentham's Panopticon (whose inmates did not know they were being watched) into a world where constant surveillance was a certainty and quiescence the inevitable result. There must surely come a point (though it comes at different places for different people) where the escalation of intrusive powers becomes too high a price to pay for a safer and more law abiding environment." [13.21]
panopticon  jeremy-bentham  law  uk  dripa  ripa  surveillance  spying  police  drones  facial-recognition  future  tracking  cctv  crime 
november 2015 by jm
Schneier on Automatic Face Recognition and Surveillance
When we talk about surveillance, we tend to concentrate on the problems of data collection: CCTV cameras, tagged photos, purchasing habits, our writings on sites like Facebook and Twitter. We think much less about data analysis. But effective and pervasive surveillance is just as much about analysis. It's sustained by a combination of cheap and ubiquitous cameras, tagged photo databases, commercial databases of our actions that reveal our habits and personalities, and ­-- most of all ­-- fast and accurate face recognition software.

Don't expect to have access to this technology for yourself anytime soon. This is not facial recognition for all. It's just for those who can either demand or pay for access to the required technologies ­-- most importantly, the tagged photo databases. And while we can easily imagine how this might be misused in a totalitarian country, there are dangers in free societies as well. Without meaningful regulation, we're moving into a world where governments and corporations will be able to identify people both in real time and backwards in time, remotely and in secret, without consent or recourse.

Despite protests from industry, we need to regulate this budding industry. We need limitations on how our images can be collected without our knowledge or consent, and on how they can be used. The technologies aren't going away, and we can't uninvent these capabilities. But we can ensure that they're used ethically and responsibly, and not just as a mechanism to increase police and corporate power over us.
privacy  regulation  surveillance  bruce-schneier  faces  face-recognition  machine-learning  ai  cctv  photos 
october 2015 by jm
Eyes Over Compton: How Police Spied on a Whole City
The law-enforcement pervasive-surveillance CCTV PVR.
In a secret test of mass surveillance technology, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department sent a civilian aircraft* over Compton, California, capturing high-resolution video of everything that happened inside that 10-square-mile municipality. Compton residents weren't told about the spying, which happened in 2012. "We literally watched all of Compton during the times that we were flying, so we could zoom in anywhere within the city of Compton and follow cars and see people," Ross McNutt of Persistence Surveillance Systems told the Center for Investigative Reporting, which unearthed and did the first reporting on this important story. The technology he's trying to sell to police departments all over America can stay aloft for up to six hours. Like Google Earth, it enables police to zoom in on certain areas. And like TiVo, it permits them to rewind, so that they can look back and see what happened anywhere they weren't watching in real time. 


(via New Aesthetic)
pvr  cctv  law-enforcement  police  compton  los-angeles  law  surveillance  future 
april 2014 by jm

Copy this bookmark:



description:


tags: