Facial Recognition

Seattle Port Commission Shouldn’t Collaborate with Border Patrol on Facial Recognition at SEATAC.

by  •  • 0 Comments

30 civil rights groups are asking the Seattle Port Commission to rescind its sanction of face recognition technology at Seattle-Tacoma Airport. The Port Commission, which oversees the Northwest’s largest international airport, had voted unanimously to collaborate with Customs and Border Patrol in the issuance of a 5.7 million dollar request for proposals (RFP) for the procurement and implementation of face surveillance at the airport.

Port Commissioners had stated they felt they “had no choice” but to go along with CPB’s plans, but as the letter from the 20 civil liberties groups states:

The Seattle Port Commission has a choice not to collaborate with CBP and should not facilitate CBP’s unauthorized surveillance of U.S. citizens.

Read more →

Shotspotter Gunshot Detection

Civil Rights and Racial Bias Issues Boil for Surveillance Vendor Shotspotter.

by  •  • 0 Comments

Community groups are continuing to advocate against the spread of Shotspotter gun detection technology. In Columbus, Ohio, a viral video of police abuse following a Shotspotter alert enraged the community and incited advocates who “noted the consistency of the technology being installed predominantly in communities of color”.

The Ohio Students Association (OSA Cleveland) told Coda (article linked below): “OSA will be in attendance and make our voices heard regarding our concerns about Shotspotter’s threats to Clevelanders’ civil liberties. As part of the Coalition to Stop the Inhumanity at the Cuyahoga County Jail, we will be working to spread the word and educate people about Shotspotter and make sure the community is aware”.

Coda: Gunshot Detection Technology Raises Concerns of Bias

In August of 2019, a federal judge refused to dismiss civil conspiracy charges against Shotspotter Inc. for colluding with the Rochester Police Department to violate the civil rights of Silvon Simmons, a Black man who was shot three times by the Rochester Police Department and later acquitted of four felony charges.

Read more →

License Plate Readers

License Plate Readers at Vallejo Ferry Terminal

by  •  • 0 Comments

by Mike Katz-Lacabe

The Vallejo Police Department cited ferry terrorism as part of its $30,000 grant application for license plate readers, calling the ferry “a viable threat for a terrorist act.”

According to the grant application, the “Grant Funds will be utilized to establish an ALPR [Automated License Plate Reader] camera system for eastbound and westbound traffic lanes approaching the Ferry Terminal, Ferry Terminal Parking Structure and waterfront.”

Read more →

Data Privacy

Privacy Advocates Stay On CA AG To Tighten CCPA Rules

by  •  • 0 Comments

Privacy advocates, including Oakland Privacy, commented on the second iteration of operational rules for the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, which the AG hopes to begin enforcing on July 1, 2020.

The statewide coalition of privacy groups asked the AG not to back down on the start of the enforcement period, as some industry groups have asked, to require more transparency from data brokers, to enforce do not track software as equivalent to a filed opt-in request and to prevent service providers from forming comprehensive customer profiles.

Read more →

Facial Recognition

San Mateo County Sheriff Used Clearview AI 2,700+ Times

by  •  • 0 Comments

Public records requests associated with the expose of Cleaview AI, a shady facial recognition startup that scraped billions of images from social media and then sold access to that database to at least 2,200 customers, reveal that the San Mateo Sheriff’s Department was a prolific Clearview AI user.

Buzzfeed had previously reported the SMC Sheriff had conducted “about 2,000” searches. The email correspondence between Clearview staff and county staff show the actual number to be “2700+”.

Jimmy Chan, deputy sheriff in San Mateo County asks for “clarification” on the data breach reported by Clearview AI in order to “answer inevitable questions that will come from our command staff and to help formulate a response to any media/public relations query that will be forthcoming”.

The email correspondence dates from February 25-27, 2020 and can be viewed here.

Read more →

Body Worn Cameras, Transparency Ordinance

Body Worn Camera Policy Modified by Council Review in Berkeley

by  •  • 0 Comments

On March 10, the Berkeley City Council completed their mandatory review of body worn camera policy under the surveillance transparency (CCOPS) ordinance passed in the City in March of 2018.

Surveillance transparency laws require the legislative body to formally approve the law enforcement policy. Berkeley’s mandated review resulted in significant improvements to the policy, including the submission of an initial report in the event of grave bodily injury death prior to the viewing of footage by an involved officer.

Read more →