37 ms·

Not sure why this is being downvoted, it is an actual thing: “Several companies operate independent, non-law enforcement ALPR databases, contracting with drive

Not sure why this is being downvoted, it is an actual thing: “Several companies operate independent, non-law enforcement ALPR databases, contracting with drivers to put cameras on private vehicles to collect the information.” https://www.eff.org/pages/automated-license-plate-readers-alpr https://www.eff.org/pages/automated-license-plate-readers-al... Motherboard did a deeper dive on one of them: “DRN is a private surveillance system crowdsourced by hundreds of repo men who have installed cameras that passively scan, capture, and upload the license plates of every car they drive by to DRN's database. DRN stretches coast to coast and is available to private individuals and companies focused on tracking and locating people or vehicles.” https://www.vice.com/en/article/ne879z/i-tracked-someone-with-license-plate-readers-drn https://www.vice.com/en/article/ne879z/i-tracked-someone-wit...

milesvp 4y ago
To further this, I know someone who was a public defender a decade ago in the US. They would regularly try to get intersection camera footage to attempt to prove their clients not guilty. Often it was impossible to track down who owned the cameras, or even if they were municiple or private. I imagine this has only gotten worse as cameras have gotten cheaper.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- QuarterReptile 4y ago
  Tape over lens and watch who comes out? I am very much not a lawyer.
  - londons_explore 4y ago
    I'd bet half the time nobody will come out. So many systems are legacy and entirely unused, or best effort - ie. if the camera is working, it'll be used, but nobody will be sent to repair it if it's broken.
schainks 4y ago
Wow, this sounds very illegal in my state. I wonder if DRN even respects my state's laws about storing my personal information.
- argiopetech 4y ago
  Is the location of your state-registered vehicle vehicle on publicly owned roads personal information in your state? Despite the phrasing, I'm honestly curious.
  - pjleonhardt 4y ago
    No, but likely his face biometrics are off he happens to have been captured in the video. So if they are keeping the raw video, not just the processed license plate output, they may fall under this jurisdiction.
    - mminer237 4y ago
      Assuming you're talking about the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, that only requires consent for facial recognition databases based on facial geometry. The law explicitly allows storing photographs of people's faces without consent.
  - breakingcups 4y ago
    It's probably not, which is the problem. I feel like the wilful processing of such details into parse-able, privacy-violating form should be regulated.
- rnk 4y ago
  What state is that, California? I'd love to have a way to block ubiquitous surveillance, also places taking your picture when you walk into a drugstore or restaurant, uploading it. If it hasn't happened yet, we will be tracked all the time.
justapassenger 4y ago
I didn't downvote it, but $50 for cameras is not even a blip in the cost of setting operation like that, and op's comment make it sound, like that's all you need. Surveillance is easy now. But not yet $50 easy.

milesvp 4y ago

To further this, I know someone who was a public defender a decade ago in the US. They would regularly try to get intersection camera footage to attempt to prove their clients not guilty. Often it was impossible to track down who owned the cameras, or even if they were municiple or private. I imagine this has only gotten worse as cameras have gotten cheaper.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
QuarterReptile 4y ago
Tape over lens and watch who comes out? I am very much not a lawyer.
- londons_explore 4y ago
  I'd bet half the time nobody will come out. So many systems are legacy and entirely unused, or best effort - ie. if the camera is working, it'll be used, but nobody will be sent to repair it if it's broken.

schainks 4y ago

Wow, this sounds very illegal in my state. I wonder if DRN even respects my state's laws about storing my personal information.

argiopetech 4y ago
Is the location of your state-registered vehicle vehicle on publicly owned roads personal information in your state? Despite the phrasing, I'm honestly curious.
- pjleonhardt 4y ago
  No, but likely his face biometrics are off he happens to have been captured in the video. So if they are keeping the raw video, not just the processed license plate output, they may fall under this jurisdiction.
  - mminer237 4y ago
    Assuming you're talking about the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, that only requires consent for facial recognition databases based on facial geometry. The law explicitly allows storing photographs of people's faces without consent.
- breakingcups 4y ago
  It's probably not, which is the problem. I feel like the wilful processing of such details into parse-able, privacy-violating form should be regulated.
rnk 4y ago
What state is that, California? I'd love to have a way to block ubiquitous surveillance, also places taking your picture when you walk into a drugstore or restaurant, uploading it. If it hasn't happened yet, we will be tracked all the time.

justapassenger 4y ago

I didn't downvote it, but $50 for cameras is not even a blip in the cost of setting operation like that, and op's comment make it sound, like that's all you need. Surveillance is easy now. But not yet $50 easy.