Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Secretive Surveillance Company Is Selling Cops Cameras Hidden in Gravestones

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 58 posts

Re: Secretive Surveillance Company Is Selling Cops Cameras Hidden in Gravestones

#11

Post by rahuldottech »

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22022010

Copying my comments from there:

---

> In warning the site not to disclose the brochure, SSG’s attorney reportedly claimed the document is protected under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), though the notice did not point to any specific section of the law, which was enacted to regulate arms exports at the height of the Cold War.

We really need an overhaul of all these old laws that were enacted for a completely different era, which are now being misused. Another example is 200 year old laws being used to get companies to break encryption.

---

I don't know how I feel about hidden surveillance cameras in public. I know I shouldn't have any expectation of privacy in public and all that, but CCTV cameras in plain view are a different matter.

Are we going to live in a world where we're constantly being recorded and analysed by hidden cameras? This makes me very uneasy. Whatever happened to the idea that democratic governments should be for the people?

I'm sure there's no way that this can ever possibly be misused /s.

If agencies are using these for surveillance on specific targets then that's maybe okay, but as far as I'm aware, there is not much regulation regarding hidden cameras in public - at least, not in many parts of the world.

Re: Secretive Surveillance Company Is Selling Cops Cameras Hidden in Gravestones

#12

Post by onion2k »

droithomme wrote: post #2

This story is a bit weird. The company is trying to repress publication of their catalog that was obtained from a FOIA act request directed at a small police department. Well this company is emailing their catalog at police departments nationwide. Fair enough but the catalog is certainly not a matter of national security as they are abusively claiming. Their items are fairly boring and things that anyone here with a…

If a police department needs any of their items, they can save money hiring a high school student with modest skills and awareness of what's available on aliexpress.

Would evidence collected by an ad hoc device installed by a student be admissible in court? I always understood that most of these devices are expensive because they have features that can be used to verify the chain of evidence. Something bought from Aliexpress won't.

Re: Secretive Surveillance Company Is Selling Cops Cameras Hidden in Gravestones

#13

Post by swebs »

rahuldottech wrote: post #11

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22022010 Copying my comments from there: --- > In warning the site not to disclose the brochure, SSG’s attorney reportedly claimed the document is protected under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), though the notice did not point to any specific section of the law, which was enacted to regulate arms exports at the height of the Cold War. We…

>Whatever happened to the idea that democratic governments should be for the people?

Unfortunately, that idea is smeared as "populism" these days and considered wrongthink.

Re: Secretive Surveillance Company Is Selling Cops Cameras Hidden in Gravestones

#14

Post by raxxorrax »

rahuldottech wrote: post #11

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22022010 Copying my comments from there: --- > In warning the site not to disclose the brochure, SSG’s attorney reportedly claimed the document is protected under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), though the notice did not point to any specific section of the law, which was enacted to regulate arms exports at the height of the Cold War. We…

I don't like CCTV in a hidden or a visible manner. It doesn't make me feel save at all, on the contrary. I have been a target of vandalism multiple times and a cam might have helped in solving a type of crime that otherwise would very likely remain unsolved. But it is just not worth it and it is not even close.

If a camera would film my immediate vicinity where I live, I wouldn't certainly extend that vandalism to state property.

Public transport increasingly uses CCTV as do some chains of supermarkets. Otherwise it is not yet established in my country yet but I already avoid both.

And bashing a window is still nothing compared to crimes some security agencies or police forces have comitted.

Re: Secretive Surveillance Company Is Selling Cops Cameras Hidden in Gravestones

#15

Post by harimau777 »

I often see people say that we don't have an expectation of privacy in public. However, it seems to me that ignores the nuance of actual social norms.

- Eavesdropping is generally considered anti-social.

- Taking up-skirt pictures in public is, I presume, illegal.

- If someone buys their prescriptions at a public grocery store, would it be alright for someone in the store to photograph their medical data?

It seems to me that the law needs to differentiate between the general sense in which one doesn't have privacy in public (e.g. the public probably has the right to know if a "family values" politician goes to a strip club) and actively spying on someone.

This is particularly the case when technology makes spying possible in a way that it wasn't previously. For example, I imagine it's not uncommon for many people to carry confidential information openly (say carrying a prescription in your hand as you walk to the grocery store) because it's not realistically possible for someone to read it and connect it to you. However, that changes with high speed photography, OCR, and facial recognition.

Re: Secretive Surveillance Company Is Selling Cops Cameras Hidden in Gravestones

#16

Post by dsfyu404ed »

londons_explore wrote: post #9
droithomme wrote: post #2

This story is a bit weird. The company is trying to repress publication of their catalog that was obtained from a FOIA act request directed at a small police department. Well this company is emailing their catalog at police departments nationwide. Fair enough but the catalog is certainly not a matter of national security as they are abusively claiming. Their items are fairly boring and things that anyone here with a…

I suspect moreso if it becomes common knowledge exactly what the 'police baby seat' looks like, police investigatons might be compromised. I'd like to see the risk assessment of whoever made that baby seat though - removing a chunk of foam and replacing it with electronics doesn't sound good for the baby's health in case of an accident, and I doubt very much the manufacturer of police spy gear has the expertise to re…

>I suspect moreso if it becomes common knowledge exactly what the 'police baby seat' looks like, police investigatons might be compromised.

I think it's more likely that they don't want to be forced to reduce their profit margin by having to embed their crap in a wider variety of baby seats, grave markets, alarm clocks, etc. If they can skate by with one or two models of each they will make more money.

>Removing a chunk of foam and replacing it with electronics doesn't sound good for the baby's health in case of an accident, and I doubt very much the manufacturer of police spy gear has the expertise to re-test it.

Call me cynical but they likely don't care about that because they almost certainly make the departments take responsibility for use of their products. The departments don't care about being liable because they can usually hand-wave that sort of thing away under qualified immunity and if a judge does make them take responsibility and the departments don't care because the lawsuits are paid with our money, not theirs.

Re: Secretive Surveillance Company Is Selling Cops Cameras Hidden in Gravestones

#18

Post by nyolfen »

bitL wrote: post #17

This in conjunction with 5G would make surveillance complete. I wouldn't be surprised if 5G got some free channel/band used specifically for "telemetry" from all 5G-capable devices around, transferring real-time audio etc.

there is nothing special about 5g vs current solutions. it’s just faster and supports more clients per station with worse range.

Re: Secretive Surveillance Company Is Selling Cops Cameras Hidden in Gravestones

#19

Post by bitL »

nyolfen wrote: post #18
bitL wrote: post #17

This in conjunction with 5G would make surveillance complete. I wouldn't be surprised if 5G got some free channel/band used specifically for "telemetry" from all 5G-capable devices around, transferring real-time audio etc.

there is nothing special about 5g vs current solutions. it’s just faster and supports more clients per station with worse range.

It's just there is too much bandwidth there and some could be repurposed for "telemetry". Many things can be derived from parallel audio/video/IMU streams from multiple phones/devices around a certain spot of interest. Storing them for e.g. a month, automatically analyzing streams with Deep Learning, with suspected ones passed over for a human review. 5G could be a testing tech for that due to bandwidth capabilities.

Re: Secretive Surveillance Company Is Selling Cops Cameras Hidden in Gravestones

#20

Post by Nasrudith »

rahuldottech wrote: post #11

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22022010 Copying my comments from there: --- > In warning the site not to disclose the brochure, SSG’s attorney reportedly claimed the document is protected under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), though the notice did not point to any specific section of the law, which was enacted to regulate arms exports at the height of the Cold War. We…

They are nothinh but flaming corrupt hypocrites. They operate in the business of surveilance yet have the gall to complain about their non-existant right to privacy as an organization?

The fact they aren't even citing the subsections hints at specious legal intimidation. The complexity is too high, lawyers are too expensive, and abuses of the law go too unpunished.

Post reply on HN