4 ms·

I guess citizens will have to be the ones wearing body cameras.

RHSeeger 9y ago
I hear about people recording the police with their phones now and again, and it always makes me think of the balance between 1. If I have my phone on and recording, the police can seize it (ie, grab it from me). At best, I'd be able to turn it off, but it's been shown multiple times that they can force me to provide my fingerprint to unlock it. 2. If I turn my phone off (so they need my pin, which they can't force from me), I can't record.
- stretchwithme 9y ago
  I would stop using your fingerprint to unlock.
- CJefferson 9y ago
  I would love an app which started recording, while making best effort to get the video off my phone and into the cloud ASAP, perhaps sending only sound and a low quality image if bandwidth is low.
  - ajnin 9y ago
    The Owncloud Android app (https://f-droid.org/packages/com.owncloud.android/ https://f-droid.org/packages/com.owncloud.android/) has options to automatically upload pictures and videos as they are taken. It's working well for pictures, for videos it tends to fail if they are too big but I guess that with suitably low quality settings that would be acceptable.
  - raisedbyninjas 9y ago
    https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bambuser.broadcaster&hl=en https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bambuser.b...
  - mikeytown2 9y ago
    Good list of apps https://www.copblock.org/apps/ https://www.copblock.org/apps/
- e12e 9y ago
  At least on my Sony/Android phone it's possible to access a subset of the camera app from the lock screen (phone locked). No fingerprint reader, and the "pin" is a passphrase. The phone is encrypted - but the battery isn't removable, and I assume there's more than one way to get at the data as long as the phone stays on (usb/pin header access, some form of cold boot attack, kernel 0day). I seem to recall the iPhone used to be similar wrt using the camera on a locked device - you can disable the touch id and enable a more secure pin? (although, if it's still possible to brute force the hsm, going to a "secure" number of digits isn't really practical. But six digits with three attempts before actually hardware enforced cool down should help a bit. But even at just 1 guesses / 3 seconds on average, it'd at worst take a month (15 days on average) to get into such a device, assuming an automated/robot brute force toolkit - especially with faulty tamper resistant hw).
andai 9y ago
What's the law say about recording police?
- zaroth 9y ago
  I believe in every jurisdiction that it's been tested it's been found to be constitutionally protected.
  - Sacho 9y ago
    It doesn't matter in a practical sense. How are you going to prove the LEO prevented you from recording? It's your word (as a now suspect of a crime) vs their word, a respected public servant, and their partner, who will swear by them. Even if you do prove they stopped you from recording, so what? You don't have evidence of your interaction to implicate them. As long as they recite the magical words, that they believed they were in the right, current legal doctrine will look the other way(see Heien vs North Carolina - https://blog.simplejustice.us/2014/12/16/heien-v-north-carolina-close-enough/ https://blog.simplejustice.us/2014/12/16/heien-v-north-carol... - and similar).
    - stale2002 9y ago
      It's not your word vs them. You just start recording them, and then if they try to stop you, their attempt to stop you is now recorded, and hopefully in the cloud where they can't delete it.

I hear about people recording the police with their phones now and again, and it always makes me think of the balance between 1. If I have my phone on and recording, the police can seize it (ie, grab it from me). At best, I'd be able to turn it off, but it's been shown multiple times that they can force me to provide my fingerprint to unlock it. 2. If I turn my phone off (so they need my pin, which they can't force from me), I can't record.

stretchwithme 9y ago
I would stop using your fingerprint to unlock.
CJefferson 9y ago
I would love an app which started recording, while making best effort to get the video off my phone and into the cloud ASAP, perhaps sending only sound and a low quality image if bandwidth is low.
- ajnin 9y ago
  The Owncloud Android app (https://f-droid.org/packages/com.owncloud.android/ https://f-droid.org/packages/com.owncloud.android/) has options to automatically upload pictures and videos as they are taken. It's working well for pictures, for videos it tends to fail if they are too big but I guess that with suitably low quality settings that would be acceptable.
- raisedbyninjas 9y ago
  https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bambuser.broadcaster&hl=en https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bambuser.b...
- mikeytown2 9y ago
  Good list of apps https://www.copblock.org/apps/ https://www.copblock.org/apps/
e12e 9y ago
At least on my Sony/Android phone it's possible to access a subset of the camera app from the lock screen (phone locked). No fingerprint reader, and the "pin" is a passphrase. The phone is encrypted - but the battery isn't removable, and I assume there's more than one way to get at the data as long as the phone stays on (usb/pin header access, some form of cold boot attack, kernel 0day). I seem to recall the iPhone used to be similar wrt using the camera on a locked device - you can disable the touch id and enable a more secure pin? (although, if it's still possible to brute force the hsm, going to a "secure" number of digits isn't really practical. But six digits with three attempts before actually hardware enforced cool down should help a bit. But even at just 1 guesses / 3 seconds on average, it'd at worst take a month (15 days on average) to get into such a device, assuming an automated/robot brute force toolkit - especially with faulty tamper resistant hw).

andai 9y ago

What's the law say about recording police?

zaroth 9y ago
I believe in every jurisdiction that it's been tested it's been found to be constitutionally protected.
- Sacho 9y ago
  It doesn't matter in a practical sense. How are you going to prove the LEO prevented you from recording? It's your word (as a now suspect of a crime) vs their word, a respected public servant, and their partner, who will swear by them. Even if you do prove they stopped you from recording, so what? You don't have evidence of your interaction to implicate them. As long as they recite the magical words, that they believed they were in the right, current legal doctrine will look the other way(see Heien vs North Carolina - https://blog.simplejustice.us/2014/12/16/heien-v-north-carolina-close-enough/ https://blog.simplejustice.us/2014/12/16/heien-v-north-carol... - and similar).
  - stale2002 9y ago
    It's not your word vs them. You just start recording them, and then if they try to stop you, their attempt to stop you is now recorded, and hopefully in the cloud where they can't delete it.