The Big Brother Thread

[OUTLAW 09]

A perfect example of how militay surveillance technology the Stingray which had it's first appearance in Iraq has made it into the law enforcement and that is not a good move as it opens a number of serious privacy issues with monitoring that if not known by the person being monitored the police in theory would not have to have a judicial search warrant for the monitoring....

Example for NSA to conduct such monitoring of US citizens they require a FISA Warrant...local police evidently feel they are allowed to do it without the same judicial review....

[davidbfpo]

Maybe there has been polling on these issues before, but I don't recall such a comprehensive report in the UK following a YouGov poll.

A couple of passages:

suggests a majority of British voters are neither overly moved nor concerned by the surveillance question, and tend to err on the more hawkish side of debate. (See end of post for methodology)In a list of online issues including cybercrime, cyber attacks, surveillance, trolling, propaganda and fake news, only 21% of respondents listed UK government surveillance of its own citizens among their main concerns, compared with 66% citing cybercrime, 46% citing cyber attacks and 45% citing access to inappropriate content by children.

(Later) levels of public trust in key institutions of establishment seem relatively high, with clear majorities saying they trust judges and senior policy officers to act in the country’s best interests, and trust the police and intelligence services to behave responsibly with information obtained from online surveillance.
In short, where Britain stands on surveillance could be more about where it sits on a scale of institutional, rather than political, trust.

Link:https://rusi.org/commentary/security...r-surveillance

[davidbfpo]

A puzzling academic article 'DNA techniques could transform facial recognition technology', added here as it opens with some facts and the states there is an answer - genomics.

It opens with:

When police in London recently trialled a new facial recognition system, they made a worrying and embarrassing mistake. At the Notting Hill Carnival, the technology made roughly 35 false matches between known suspects and members of the crowd, with one person “erroneously” arrested. Camera-based visual surveillance systems were supposed to deliver a safer and more secure society. But despite decades of development, they are generally not able to handle real-life situations. During the 2011 London riots, for example, facial recognition software contributed to just one arrest out of the 4,962 that took place.

Link:https://theconversation.com/dna-tech...omment_1434283

[davidbfpo]

I missed this BBC Arabic Service report (55 mins podcast), in July 2017, and it fits here well. Their summary:

Middle Eastern governments are using high tech mass surveillance tools to monitor their citizens. Western companies, including Britain's largest weapons manufacturer, BAE, are among those selling surveillance technology to these governments.
The trade is attracting criticism from human rights organisations who question whether a British company should be selling such equipment, much of it classified, to repressive regimes in the Arab world.

Link:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-m...s-surveillance

[davidbfpo]

This IT company Palantir arouses controversy and this latest article is no exception. I did not realize that commercially it is less than successful.
Link:https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2...?terminal=true

[davidbfpo]

A good article on the problems with this new technology, although I recall several reports of deployment over ten years ago. Perhaps it is only now being released to "ordinary" police work? A 90% failure rate at one event and in London at least one false arrest. Read on.

Link:http://www.wired.co.uk/article/face-...-hill-carnival

[davidbfpo]

A typical long article from 'The Economist' on policing with the joys of more data and surveillance. It cites many different systems, nearly always with an American context and ends calling for a wider public debate - which at least here in the UK has yet to emerge.
Link:https://www.economist.com/technology...-05-02/justice