Researchers at IMDEA Networks Institute, together with European partners, have found that tire pressure sensors in modern cars can unintentionally expose drivers to tracking. Over a ten-week study, they collected signals from more than 20,000 vehicles, revealing a hidden privacy risk and highlighting the need for stronger security measures in future vehicle sensor systems. Most...
You are correct, the only thing worth mentioning is when the laws were created/written it did not account for someone creating a database that is easily searchable/queried to infer all these extra habits of people.
Its one thing visually seeing someone over and over walk or drive by your house while you sit on your porch. It’s another thing to now know where they came from and where they went if you were able to sit on every porch at the same time in a town or city.
This is why police tails need to be granted by a judge, but a interconnected network of cameras at the moment does not recieve the same scrutiny.
I think part of why the cameras don’t have such scrutiny is the city often has signs stating they use the cameras and will list their locations. This gives a somewhat implied consent from the driver, idk if it holds up in court but its similar to a sign at a store saying you’re on CCTV. The sign doesn’t say the CCTV could be used to track and monitor you but its implied.
True, though CCTV or Closed Circuit Television used to be “fully local” and “closed”. Tapes and recordings were only available or accessible to the property or person in most situations being recorded over older recordings.
Newer tech now is interconnected with companies trying to infer extra information from full databases of recordings from multiple different locations all around a town or city, or state.
CCTV used to be like a security guard sitting on a lawn chair. Where modern security cameras/systems are like having a personal tail following you all day and night.
You are correct, the only thing worth mentioning is when the laws were created/written it did not account for someone creating a database that is easily searchable/queried to infer all these extra habits of people.
Its one thing visually seeing someone over and over walk or drive by your house while you sit on your porch. It’s another thing to now know where they came from and where they went if you were able to sit on every porch at the same time in a town or city.
This is why police tails need to be granted by a judge, but a interconnected network of cameras at the moment does not recieve the same scrutiny.
I think part of why the cameras don’t have such scrutiny is the city often has signs stating they use the cameras and will list their locations. This gives a somewhat implied consent from the driver, idk if it holds up in court but its similar to a sign at a store saying you’re on CCTV. The sign doesn’t say the CCTV could be used to track and monitor you but its implied.
True, though CCTV or Closed Circuit Television used to be “fully local” and “closed”. Tapes and recordings were only available or accessible to the property or person in most situations being recorded over older recordings.
Newer tech now is interconnected with companies trying to infer extra information from full databases of recordings from multiple different locations all around a town or city, or state.
CCTV used to be like a security guard sitting on a lawn chair. Where modern security cameras/systems are like having a personal tail following you all day and night.