![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
enhf94.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
davis_squareGiven the recent news that a district court has recently affirmed that the TSA can order local goverments to lie does not have to tell the truth about security camera use, I wonder if it's time to revisit our local discussion of the surveillance cameras installed in Somerville five years ago, and the cameras installed on Somerville police cars. (This discussion might also be usefully informed by recent revelations that the NSA can break most encryption on the internet.)
At the time, I understood that the city officials were surprised that public responses to installing the cameras were limited to a public hearing, some discussions on the Davis Square LJ, and an editorial in the Somerville Journal. I was surprised, too.
In 2008, the Somerville City goverment (to my surprise) refused to disclose information about where the cameras were placed, although when public interest peaked, several cameras were identified by the public. I don't have any data more current than that.
Also in 2008, Somerville became the first city in MA to install automatic license-plate checking cameras on police vehicles, which at the time could check 1500 license plates per hour (functionally, all clearly visible plates).
I think it's reasonable to wonder about any of the following: the software has been upgraded since 2008, more cameras may have been installed since 2008, the data may be kept for longer than the originally-stated two weeks, and it is likely that the cameras have been connected to a larger Homeland Security surveillance system.
Several folks on the DSLJ suggested a trial period of a year, which has passed. I don't know of any evidence that the cameras have been useful in deterring crime. Private cameras were, apparently, key, in identifying the Marathon bombers. I do know of abuse of CCTV; here is an example using license-plate-lookup cameras. Here is an example (original article behind paywall; link is a cut-and-paste) of Detroit law enforcement's abuse of databases to track ex-lovers, extort money, and run plates of political opponents' supporters.
I found this locally-written essay particularly cogent - questioning the effectiveness, value, and potential for abuse of these systems.
TL;DR: Somerville is watching you with Homeland-Security-connected cameras. Effectiveness is unproven, but in other locales, abuse is documented; also, local governments have, at times, been ordered to lie about camera use. All sources verified non-wingnut in my view.
ETA: based on first comment, changed language about TSA case to more accurately reflect Schneier's verbage.
At the time, I understood that the city officials were surprised that public responses to installing the cameras were limited to a public hearing, some discussions on the Davis Square LJ, and an editorial in the Somerville Journal. I was surprised, too.
In 2008, the Somerville City goverment (to my surprise) refused to disclose information about where the cameras were placed, although when public interest peaked, several cameras were identified by the public. I don't have any data more current than that.
Also in 2008, Somerville became the first city in MA to install automatic license-plate checking cameras on police vehicles, which at the time could check 1500 license plates per hour (functionally, all clearly visible plates).
I think it's reasonable to wonder about any of the following: the software has been upgraded since 2008, more cameras may have been installed since 2008, the data may be kept for longer than the originally-stated two weeks, and it is likely that the cameras have been connected to a larger Homeland Security surveillance system.
Several folks on the DSLJ suggested a trial period of a year, which has passed. I don't know of any evidence that the cameras have been useful in deterring crime. Private cameras were, apparently, key, in identifying the Marathon bombers. I do know of abuse of CCTV; here is an example using license-plate-lookup cameras. Here is an example (original article behind paywall; link is a cut-and-paste) of Detroit law enforcement's abuse of databases to track ex-lovers, extort money, and run plates of political opponents' supporters.
I found this locally-written essay particularly cogent - questioning the effectiveness, value, and potential for abuse of these systems.
TL;DR: Somerville is watching you with Homeland-Security-connected cameras. Effectiveness is unproven, but in other locales, abuse is documented; also, local governments have, at times, been ordered to lie about camera use. All sources verified non-wingnut in my view.
ETA: based on first comment, changed language about TSA case to more accurately reflect Schneier's verbage.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}