4 ms·

This serves as a good example of why privacy should be protected. Even under the assumption the police use data collected only for legitimate purposes, it only

This serves as a good example of why privacy should be protected. Even under the assumption the police use data collected only for legitimate purposes, it only takes one corrupt officer for anyone to have access for less savory ends; While these are of course contrived cases, consider the stalker who purchases access to a facial recognition database, a robber who uses the mentioned phone tracking system to determine when a house is empty, or an identity thief who buys recordings from unnecessary phone taps. The most reliable way to prevent any of this is to avoid infringement of privacy and surveillance overreach.

geezerjay 8y ago
Some time ago a manager of a portuguese football team who was a former intelligence officer was caught paying off tax service workers to gain access to spending habits of some referees. His goal was to use that info to blackmail them to submission and force them to favour his team.
- onetimemanytime 8y ago
  I can imagine certain hedge funds paying top dollar for inside info from FDA, Apple suppliers etc etc.
- ataturk 8y ago
  I don't understand how blackmail works. If anyone tried to blackmail me, I would find them and then throw them down some stairs and then kick the shit out of them until they understood the situation. I think only meek people allow this crap to happen to them.
Shivetya 8y ago
All government records should have a public available audit of all access activities. The user or group making the request should always be revealed except by court order and those should still be acknowledge or determinable by some means. The type of data revealed can be classified into groups indicating how detailed it is, from simple identification confirmation to tax and criminal records. the key is public access to the the logs of access. next step would be giving the public the ability to challenge the data within reasonable limits
- bamboozled 8y ago
  That reinforces the OPs point though. If that system can be circumvented, all bets are off. If there wasn't centralized databases full of private information on individuals, this wouldn't b possible.
- geofft 8y ago
  That doesn't help much unless there's a meaningful punishment for officers who abuse this access. Since in the US we are happy to re-hire police officers who have been publicly known to kill people without actual cause (e.g. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/officer-who-fatally-shot-tamir-rice-hired-bellaire-ohio-police-n917391 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/officer-who-fatally-sho... ) I have trouble believing that a record of police officers who merely abuse surveillance data will do much.
- peteri 8y ago
  This has always been my preferred option for data sharing with government (or even private companies). It should stop people looking up celebrities or ex-lovers details just because they're bored. For practical purposes there should be delay (say six months) so an investigation stands a chance of not tipping off the person being investigated. For delays longer than six months to keep the access hidden a full court order is required.
a1369209993 8y ago
> these are of course contrived cases No they aren't. Those are all obvious and inevitable uses (well, ab-uses) of a bribable official in a context where govenment data collection is tolerated.

geezerjay 8y ago

Some time ago a manager of a portuguese football team who was a former intelligence officer was caught paying off tax service workers to gain access to spending habits of some referees. His goal was to use that info to blackmail them to submission and force them to favour his team.

onetimemanytime 8y ago
I can imagine certain hedge funds paying top dollar for inside info from FDA, Apple suppliers etc etc.
ataturk 8y ago
I don't understand how blackmail works. If anyone tried to blackmail me, I would find them and then throw them down some stairs and then kick the shit out of them until they understood the situation. I think only meek people allow this crap to happen to them.

Shivetya 8y ago

All government records should have a public available audit of all access activities. The user or group making the request should always be revealed except by court order and those should still be acknowledge or determinable by some means. The type of data revealed can be classified into groups indicating how detailed it is, from simple identification confirmation to tax and criminal records. the key is public access to the the logs of access. next step would be giving the public the ability to challenge the data within reasonable limits

bamboozled 8y ago
That reinforces the OPs point though. If that system can be circumvented, all bets are off. If there wasn't centralized databases full of private information on individuals, this wouldn't b possible.
geofft 8y ago
That doesn't help much unless there's a meaningful punishment for officers who abuse this access. Since in the US we are happy to re-hire police officers who have been publicly known to kill people without actual cause (e.g. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/officer-who-fatally-shot-tamir-rice-hired-bellaire-ohio-police-n917391 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/officer-who-fatally-sho... ) I have trouble believing that a record of police officers who merely abuse surveillance data will do much.
peteri 8y ago
This has always been my preferred option for data sharing with government (or even private companies). It should stop people looking up celebrities or ex-lovers details just because they're bored. For practical purposes there should be delay (say six months) so an investigation stands a chance of not tipping off the person being investigated. For delays longer than six months to keep the access hidden a full court order is required.

a1369209993 8y ago

> these are of course contrived cases No they aren't. Those are all obvious and inevitable uses (well, ab-uses) of a bribable official in a context where govenment data collection is tolerated.