FBI operating fleet of surveillance aircraft flying over US cities • Hacker News Board

Re: FBI operating fleet of surveillance aircraft flying over US cities

#51

Post by andreyf » Tue, Jun 02, 2015, 6:04 PM UTC

deathhand wrote: post #7

> The FBI asked the AP not to disclose the names of the fake companies it uncovered, saying that would saddle taxpayers with the expense of creating new cover companies to shield the government’s involvement, and could endanger the planes and integrity of the surveillance missions. The AP declined the FBI’s request because the companies’ names – as well as common addresses linked to the Justice Department – are liste…

Gumption? They're just calling out sloppy work. Either you don't need secret cover companies, or they shouldn't be uncoverable via public data.

Re: FBI operating fleet of surveillance aircraft flying over US cities

#52

Post by discardorama » Tue, Jun 02, 2015, 6:07 PM UTC

josefresco wrote: post #23

happyscrappy wrote: post #19

Wait until HN learns about satellite surveillance.

FBI Agent on Foot: OK FBI Agent in a Van: OK FBI Agent in a Plane: Not OK I'm assuming an FBI agent in a satellite would be really not OK.

Strawman. The issue is not the presence of the pilot in the airplane; it's the presence of high-res cameras, StingRays, etc.

Re: FBI operating fleet of surveillance aircraft flying over US cities

#53

Post by nosuchthing » Tue, Jun 02, 2015, 6:08 PM UTC

linkregister wrote: post #42

higherpurpose wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because now they can spy on millions vs 1. I think that makes the difference.

> Because now they can spy on millions I didn't see that part of the article, can you link me to some resources for the planes having that level of camera and computer vision technology?

[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorgon_stare

Re: FBI operating fleet of surveillance aircraft flying over US cities

#54

Post by themartorana » Tue, Jun 02, 2015, 6:12 PM UTC

denzil_correa wrote: post #8

themartorana wrote: post #6

When it was imagined, we called it "distopian" - books were written and immortalized, movies were made, warnings were served. When it happened, there was barely a murmur.

> When it was imagined, we called it "distopian" I always though it was "dystopian" but your spelling made me check again. Apparently, "distopia" is used in some romance languages like Spanish - http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distop%C3%ADa Portuguese - http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distopia Italian - http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distopia

Neat. I didn't do that on purpose... I misspelled it, but I'll leave it since you have a neat point.

Re: FBI operating fleet of surveillance aircraft flying over US cities

#55

Post by nosuchthing » Tue, Jun 02, 2015, 6:13 PM UTC

higherpurpose wrote: post #16

bediger4000 wrote: post #3

How can an ordinary person tell if one of these spy planes is currently overhead? Is there some way to dink with them, similar to Matt Blaze's in-band signalling vulnerabilities discovery(s) ( http://www.crypto.com/papers/wiretap.pdf ) ? You know, use old phones that still have SIM cards, but have them try to register constantly? I'm a bit vague on cellphone protocol details, so spare me the nit picking, and get on w…

Probably by using something like: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=de.srlabs.snoo... https://f-droid.org/repository/browse/?fdid=com.SecUpwN.AIMS... I wish this kind of "firewall" was included natively in the operating systems, though, even as an opt-in feature. It's time for OS vendors to do something about it, just like they did with local storage encryption (enabled out of the box, even).

GPG for apk Version 0.1.28-alpha-b00 - Added on 2015-05-25

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1

iQGcBAABAgAGBQJVYsrCAAoJEHoCnlTdXc56h+ML/iF4YBAbxxW81c3S9L+iAyfA X/3+xBNE4nPPuCdcXZabStCsyhI4qxmiRN1F6CfbolD5VFqv2AbFlJ7w5wHSsE+O 6zYt1i+vcNPVLRtVp1CfbjEXtoTcFaV+oKWaeln9/RHaEbV20winkNjnKaxLtCFd c/XSL5/gw4H/Garze14BWJA5QargMAYhud9hhhUTU3ToHIEkYCpMF8RDnrMk7Zfl +Jn8CH9iXhwv6HxBiAfMRlpNEID9OY1m5D7HzTrYLS3VLGGsZo/MYE5JrZcDJbXI vh7YPga9zVm4qKULZ/JMmtGaSHUAjjHol96zGA3HWraQ9FFkTnDhtp7es3+V8URV 9mFFfjcEL8SrhQDm90ImSHiH4k96+xGMb7o7sB+Phsuj/JCdwt1QG8EehN/VlB6s JfGMuiKTi78jhAHK3TOemMusGobP/+ozbt+HlbIgwPBroyJcE1az59OooB0d9w92 U4oSMKpvyC1h4NtT9icstfuAW5s25rIaA+kaoHs5aA== =Rxav -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: FBI operating fleet of surveillance aircraft flying over US cities

#56

Post by beamatronic » Tue, Jun 02, 2015, 6:20 PM UTC

msane wrote: post #25

I think this is our future, whether it's dystopian or not. Technology is eventually going to make it impossible to really prevent "Persistent aerial surveillance". What requires an expensive small blimp today might become the size of a ping pong ball (or wide area flock of them) and come out of a 3D printer tomorrow. So who will be using such tech? Governments and private entities alike - we can try to legislate agai…

"Roll the video back or forwards to know exactly where the thief is."

This is happening collaboratively today on Nextdoor.com when there is a crime in the neighborhood.

"What does your camera show, Mr. Neighbor, at such-and-such time and date?"

Re: FBI operating fleet of surveillance aircraft flying over US cities

#57

Post by beamatronic » Tue, Jun 02, 2015, 6:22 PM UTC

ninkendo wrote: post #11

Haven't they always done this? They've always used surveillance vans parked outside of suspect's houses with listening equipment, for example. They even used fake company names on the sides of the vans. Why should we be surprised they're using airplanes too?

Also in 5 years those vans will be self-driving.

Re: FBI operating fleet of surveillance aircraft flying over US cities

#58

Post by toomuchtodo » Tue, Jun 02, 2015, 6:25 PM UTC

tertius wrote: post #47

kenbellows wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... are you suggesting that the entire US population refuse to pay any taxes until surveillance issues are fixed? Because that's a terrible idea.

Stopping tax payments isn't the only way to protest.

I'd love to hear ideas on this.

I am dismayed, nay, infuriated that we waste taxpayer dollars in such a manner when the returns have been found to be non-existent. Yet, I read about atrocities committed every day by ISIS and the US government sits back and does little.

This is not the world I want to live in, and I have no idea how to solve these non-technical problems.

EDIT: Regarding downvotes and the replies as of 1433272217:

If ISIS wants us to engage them, we just sit back and allow them to rape whole villages and sell women into the sex trade?

You don't go to war for oil. You go to war for human rights and to prevent the slaughter and abuse of innocent people.

Re: FBI operating fleet of surveillance aircraft flying over US cities

#59

Post by vezzy-fnord » Tue, Jun 02, 2015, 6:29 PM UTC

patrickg_zill wrote: post #27

It is amazing how prescient the movie "Enemy of the State" (with Will Smith, Gene Hackman) was. And how it holds up to a second viewing even today.

I recommend you watch Coppola's The Conversation as well, which is what originally inspired EotS. It's far more atmospheric and psychologically tense.

Re: FBI operating fleet of surveillance aircraft flying over US cities

#60

Post by genericuser » Tue, Jun 02, 2015, 6:30 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #39

genericuser wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting from the admitted targeted surveillance with to 'everyone is being watched' seems like a bit of a slippery slope argument to me. I think, as you point out, that the overwhelming quantity of Data that would be produced by such an approach prevents this by creating a cost/benefit equilibrium for the FBI on the number of people they monitor with any regularity to build their cases.

License plate scanners are actually just scanning everyone so there is no slippery slope involved. Right now we are all being watched. It's a pure cost issue; camera + OCR + database lookup is really cheap so just tag everyone.

How did we go from the FBI flying aircraft with video cameras to license plate scanners which scan 'everyone'?

I ask because there is no mention of license plate scanners in any of the parent comments to this, or the article.

Also while I assume by everyone you mean everyone who passes through the field of view of the scanner, and not actually everyone; phrasing things in false absolutes like that does not further your point.