Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy United States

Spysats Keeping Watch on the U.S. 304

Posted by michael from the can't-read-license-plates-yet dept.
Anonymous And Slightly Nervous Coward writes "USA Today is carrying an AP story that claims three years' worth of domestic satellite surveillance courtesy of a DoD agecy called the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency. Their work includes getting cooperation from entities pointing cameras onto private property such as hotels (all you HOPE and Defcon attendees, please wave for the camera). The agency seems to be taking the aw-shucks line on what they know and to what extent they evaluate the data they get, but it's clear that their mandate is seriously overpowering the oversight structures that would normally be watching it."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Spysats Keeping Watch on the U.S. More

Spysats Keeping Watch on the U.S.

Comments Filter:

  • nothing new (Score:5, Interesting)

    by BWJones ( 18351 ) * on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:16PM (#10365366) Homepage Journal
    "Spysats" have always watched the U.S. starting with the very first Corona flights going on to the KH series from the 60's until the latest KH-12/13 Improved Crystal series. This is absolutely nothing new with organizations like the National Geospatial-Intelligence agency, that National Reconnaissance Office, the National Imaging and Mapping Agency and CIA having long standing contracts and plans to surveil regions within the boundaries of the U.S..

    When I was the subject of a recruiting effort in college for an un-named agency one of the things we discussed was merging of data modalities that would be far more powerful than capabilities then in place with the SR-71. These modalities were developed in urban areas within the U.S. such as Los Angeles and New York and a most public example was that one could see directly the collection of these data here in Salt Lake City at the last winter Olympics. Overflights of both aircraft and satellites to capture visual data, background radiation readings and other data were used in urban planning for placement of services, sniper teams, counter sniper teams and other responders. Teams were scouring this town taking images for overlay onto satellite data to build 3D models for all sorts of planning, so, yeah this is nothing new.

    What I am surprised at is how little folks know about the geospatial imaging community. It is a huge growth industry and the software that I currently use has been cobbled together from three different sources that most commonly runs on a variety of platforms from Solaris, to IRIX to Linux and Windows. I would love to see some of the code recompiled to run on OS X as some of the first code for geospatial imaging I ever saw ran on NeXTstep, not to mention that OS X is an ideal OS for this community. PCIGeomatics, ESRI, RSI etc..... are you listening?

    • Re:nothing new (Score:5, Insightful)

      by inKubus ( 199753 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:30PM (#10365538) Homepage Journal
      GIS is amazing stuff. There are a number of great trade publications that can be had for free.

      Here [tradepub.com] you can subscribe to a few for free.

      Makes great bathroom reading material. Where this stuff really begins to shine is melding of a bunch of data into a 3-d model, as you've said. Take a aerial photo of a street, add other ground photos with accurate location metadata and a standard map for wireframing.

      Then take a live video feed from a known point (or multiple points) and you can accurately transpose any movement onto a 3-d model for accurate viewing at any angle. Sort of like that fake first down line they have on football.

      Multiply it by every camera at every hotel, etc, instantly accessable by unique URL and you have an "Enemy of the State" scenario actually becoming possible. That's the road this stuff is all headed. I think it will be wonderful for security and marketing but I don't really see any useful characteristics for the common man, besides navigation. I could be wrong however.

      • Re:nothing new (Score:5, Funny)

        by Tackhead ( 54550 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:41PM (#10365662)
        > Take a aerial photo of a street, add other ground photos with accurate location metadata and a standard map for wireframing.
        > Then take a live video feed from a known point (or multiple points) and you can accurately transpose any movement onto a 3-d model for accurate viewing at any angle. Sort of like that fake first down line they have on football.
        > Multiply it by every camera at every hotel, etc, instantly accessable by unique URL and you have an "Enemy of the State" scenario actually becoming possible. That's the road this stuff is all headed. I think it will be wonderful for security and marketing but I don't really see any useful characteristics for the common man, besides navigation. I could be wrong however.

        You typed the word "navigation". Was that some sort of newfangled abbreviation or typo for "best massively-multiplayer online first-person shooter evah?" :)

    • I'm sure I speak for a few people here - does anyone have links to images from some of the higher quality satellite pics? I've seen some from the early 90s where it's obviously easy to tell which cars are sedans, station wagons, their colour, maybe even model if you know them well enough. I hadn't seen anything better, lately.

      Anyone?

      • Re:nothing new (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Gordonjcp ( 186804 )
        I saw a satellite photo taken over the West End of Glasgow on the 21st of August, 2001 at around 1300 - coincidentally the day after I bought a new (old) Mercedes estate. I was out in the work van that day, and dropped by my house to get a bit of lunch. In the image you can clearly see, in its 1 pixel-per-metre resolution, a five-pixel-by-two-pixel beigey-coloured blob, and a five-pixel-by-two-pixel white blob, right outside my house... Pale gold Merc and white van, parked nose to nose.
      • I'd be willing to bet that the gov't keeps that information classified.

        Regardless, this technology the NGA has light years behind what the NSA uses.

        I could really care less as long as the quote "...But the NGA couldn't take actions to target a specific individual, such as highlight a suspect's home, unless the information was linked directly to a national security issue" remains truthful.

    • Re:nothing new (Score:4, Interesting)

      by NoMoreNicksLeft ( 516230 ) <john.oyler@noSpAm.comcast.net> on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:39PM (#10365639) Journal
      Actually, the first few used film, which was chuted back to earth. Other than initial tests, I'd be shocked if they were wasting film to snoop on the citizens, when they had less capacity than they'd like to spy on the commies.

      Only with the advent of sending video/image data back over RF do I think it likely they might have been tempted to spy on us.

      But some of the most obvious things aren't being considered here. Do you think they'd stop at watching us, when they could plausibly listen too? We've all seen the spy supply catalogs that use laser microphones, that measure the vibrations in a pane of glass, haven't we? I'm wondering if they have one precise enough to aim at a residence or office window, and listen in. They might only be able to capture a minute or so, before the angle became wrong, but still...

      • Re:nothing new (Score:3, Insightful)

        by chill ( 34294 )
        But some of the most obvious things aren't being considered here. Do you think they'd stop at watching us, when they could plausibly listen too? We've all seen the spy supply catalogs that use laser microphones, that measure the vibrations in a pane of glass, haven't we? I'm wondering if they have one precise enough to aim at a residence or office window, and listen in. They might only be able to capture a minute or so, before the angle became wrong, but still...

        I strongly doubt it, not from satellites, a

    • Re:nothing new (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:45PM (#10365709)
      Sorry to Nitpick... The National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) is the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA). They just got the new name late last year. For those who really care, this agency used to be known as the Defence Mapping Agency prior to 1996.

  • Nothing to see (Score:5, Funny)

    by WPIDalamar ( 122110 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:16PM (#10365372) Homepage
    Weird... first 3 times I tried to load this story, I saw
    "Nothing for you to see here. Please move along."

    with no story.

    Conspiracy? I think so.

  • That's fine. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:16PM (#10365377)
    If the information here is so aw-shucks and harmless, then getting it released to the public under the FOIA should be easy. That way we can all benefit from it.

    • Re:That's fine. (Score:3, Insightful)

      by YrWrstNtmr ( 564987 )
      Just because they are not using it maliciously doesn't mean that some of the data is not sensitive.

      The problem is (as with most classified data) the collectors are the ones doing the classifying. "It's classified because I say it is."

    • Re:That's fine. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by John Murdoch ( 102085 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @03:41PM (#10366345) Homepage Journal

      In this day and age, I think it is a good thing that the government in general, and the military (especially the National Guard) in particular, has mapped the locations of plants that produce particularly toxic gases [praxair.com]. In the event of a catastrophe, merging the geo-spatial data with up-to-date information from the National Weather Service would be crucial to determining dispersal patterns and what populations would be affected. ("Affected" in the hazmat industry usually means "killed.")

      Similarly, I think it would extremely useful for the government to identify the locations of, and easiest access to, where transcontinental fiber-optic links cross the Mississippi River.

      I can think of no good reason for Joe Public to know--at the detail of lat/lon--that kind of information. Because Joe Public might just be thinking about mischief, and knowing that kind of information might give him all the help he needed.

      What the military is doing is a good thing
      They're capturing geo-spatial data. That's geography--where stuff is located. They're looking at stuff that the USGS is not looking at (the USGS looks for polling places, churches, schools, and radio towers--they do not identify or catalog hazmat locations or high-voltage power lines). That makes a lot of sense to me--somebody should be looking at this.

      The article? Note the source: the Federation of American Scientists. They're generally regarded as a left wing group that is deeply suspicious of the military. Note the tenor of the comments from the one source in the article: deeply suspicious of the military--to the point of thinking that geo-spatial mapping could be used for personal surveillance. Um, not.

      In sum, I think the FAS is getting lathered up over a misunderstanding of what the program is doing. Not every small Defense department project is a secret conspiracy.

      ...Unless, of course, they're verifying the information by flying around in Little Black Helicopters. [sss.org] 8-)

  • they laughed at me (Score:5, Funny)

    by WormholeFiend ( 674934 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:17PM (#10365390)
    when I put tinfoil all over the roof of my house... but who's laughing now?

    • The answer (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:20PM (#10365423)
      "But who's laughing now?"

      The Alcoa Corporation, makers of Reynolds Wrap. [alcoa.com]
      • How many times do we have to tell you . . . they make Aluminum foil!!

        • Re:The answer (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Jucius Maximus ( 229128 )
          " How many times do we have to tell you . . . they make Aluminum foil!!"

          I actually do have a piece of aluminium (English spelling) foil in my wallet. It's spread in that little 'secret zipper compartment' at the back of the wallet, thus becoming the 'outer' layer of the closed wallet, aside from the leather of course.

          Since I put it in a couple of months ago, I have flown on four domestic airline flights in the US and two international onces between the US and Canada and the security folks did not give m

    • Re:they laughed at me (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Thanks. You've just made it all nice and shiny so we can see it better.

      And could you do us a favor? Put on a shirt when you go out to empty the mailbox. You're really scaring us.
    • Me, I didn't take any chances. I put some plywood, some tar paper and finally, some shingling.

      You're never too careful.

    • Haven't you figured it out yet *THEY* started that story because it makes your house stand out. That way they can give you more personal attention.........

  • Huh? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by over_exposed ( 623791 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:18PM (#10365403) Homepage
    ... pointing cameras onto private property such as hotels...

    How exactly do spy satellites see into hotels? HOPE is (at least when I went two times ago) was INSIDE the hotel. The only ones in fear of being seen by the sats would be the smokers and the stage crew moving crap all day...

    • Re:Huh? (Score:3, Informative)

      by kmmatthews ( 779425 )
      Not the sats themselves, rather the hotels internal security cameras.

      spam me at krism@mailsnare.net [mailto] .. please! i'm training my spam filter <g>

    • Re:Huh? (Score:3, Funny)

      by TykeClone ( 668449 )
      It's those evil smokers that they're after!

      • Re:Huh? (Score:2)

        by AoT ( 107216 )
        But we just smoked in the stairwell at HOPE. Luckily we were only on the rook at night; they can't ID you from your infrared signature, can they?
        • In all seriousness, I think that they can. I remember seeing somewhere that the heat signature on your face was as good of an identifier as a fingerprint.
      • I get it now. Ever notice that the more satellites that are launched the less smokers there are?

        Hmmm, coincidences or conspiracy?

  • duh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Necron69 ( 35644 ) <jscott DOT farrow AT gmail DOT com> on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:19PM (#10365411)
    Repeat after me: "You have no right to privacy in public." (especially when you are outdoors)

    Seriously, which three of you didn't already think the goverment was doing this?

    - Necron69

    • Re:duh (Score:5, Interesting)

      by garcia ( 6573 ) * on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:25PM (#10365482)
      Repeat after me: "You have no right to privacy in public." (especially when you are outdoors)

      Slippery slope. Yeah, we have "no right" to privacy in public. Yeah, we know that the government and Major League Baseball have been spying on us for years from the eyes in the skies... What I want to know is what we are doing to stop them from continuing their infiltration into our personal lives that we live behind closed doors.

      • Re:duh (Score:3, Funny)

        by twiddlingbits ( 707452 )
        "What I want to know is what we are doing to stop them from continuing their infiltration into our personal lives that we live behind closed door"... Haven't you lined the inside of your roof with tinfoil or lead yet? It works great on those thought sensors the Sattelites have now. The lining will also stop the mind-control rays the aliens are using to get you to buy the things you see on the Home Shopping Network. I haven't bought a thing from HSN or had any visitors from three letter Government agencies

        • Re:duh (Score:2, Funny)

          by broller ( 74249 )
          Haven't you lined the inside of your roof with tinfoil or lead yet?

          I've done this of course, but I've gone one step further. When I heard about that Fluoride [google.com] stuff the government puts in our water, I replaced all of my indoor plumbing with lead pipes to help counter the effects. Nothing's getting into MY mind!

          Did you know that they don't even SELL lead pipes for home plumbing anymore? That's how bad this is people!
        • If you line your roof with lead the only three letter agency that comes to visit will be the EPA.

      • Re:duh (Score:5, Funny)

        by LostCluster ( 625375 ) * on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:33PM (#10365582)
        What I want to know is what we are doing to stop them from continuing their infiltration into our personal lives that we live behind closed doors.

        There are major chains of stores operating under names such as "Home Depot" and "Lowes" that carry state-of-the-art camera blocking devices such as roofing tiles and window shades...

        • There are major chains of stores operating under names such as "Home Depot" and "Lowes" that carry state-of-the-art camera blocking devices such as roofing tiles and window shades...

          Well, crap. Now that someone's said something I'm sure these chain stores will be sued under the DMCA...

      • Re:duh (Score:5, Funny)

        by sevinkey ( 448480 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:40PM (#10365650)
        What I want to know is what we are doing to stop them from continuing their infiltration into our personal lives that we live behind closed doors.

        Something tells me it's not voting republican :)

        (disclaimer: joke about marriage amendment... not trying troll)

      • Re:duh (Score:5, Insightful)

        by randyflood ( 183756 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:45PM (#10365695) Homepage Journal
        Um, But there is this law that says that the Defense Department is not allowed to spy on Us Citizens on US soil... I'm not saying that we should have a *right* to privacy in public. But, at the same time, why should we pay our tax dollars to have the military spy on US citicens, when they could be looking for terrorists?

        We carefully create intelligence oversight rules because we want to be sure that the military doesn't abuse its power to conduct intelligence operations against US citizens. Remember, that we entrust the governement with power and authority to conduct these operations for specific purposes. It may very well be that in this case the power is not being abused at all. However, we should always carefully scrutinize these kind of issues. It is better to be safe than sorry...

        • Re:duh (Score:3, Insightful)

          by garcia ( 6573 ) *
          But, at the same time, why should we pay our tax dollars to have the military spy on US citicens, when they could be looking for terrorists?

          Because the public is happy to be lumped into the same group as the terrorists.
        • But, at the same time, why should we pay our tax dollars to have the military spy on US citicens, when they could be looking for terrorists?

          You weren't under the impression that those hijackers magically appeared here from Afghanistan right before their flights, were you?

        • I'd rather that they... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by MacFury ( 659201 ) <me@nOsPAM.johnkramlich.com> on Monday September 27, 2004 @03:59PM (#10366511) Homepage
          when they could be looking for terrorists...

          I'd rather the US government stop creating terrorists. Then we wouldn't have to go looking for them.

      • What I want to know is what we are doing to stop them from continuing their infiltration into our personal lives that we live behind closed doors.

        I'm sorry, can you give me examples? Start with the "continuing" part.

    • Re:duh (Score:3, Funny)

      by jrod2027 ( 809997 )
      Repeat after me: "You have no right to privacy in public." (especially when you are outdoors)

      And especially if you're an attractive woman that likes to leave her curtains open.

    • Re:duh (Score:4, Informative)

      by tsg ( 262138 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:50PM (#10365766)
      Repeat after me: "You have no right to privacy in public." (especially when you are outdoors)

      *sigh* That you have a reduced expectation of privacy does not mean you have no right to privacy and doesn't mean the government has the right to record every move you make simply because you left your house.

    • Re:duh (Score:3, Insightful)

      by peachpuff ( 638856 )

      "Repeat after me: 'You have no right to privacy in public.' (especially when you are outdoors)"

      Truth through repetition is bad for the brain.

      If you're in public, you can certainly be looked at by the other people around you, but that doesn't mean you have no right to privacy at all. Should the government be randomly stopping people on the street and checking their pockets, or maybe strip-searching them? Should anyone who speaks in public be forced to answer questions about their medical history? No

    • Re:duh (Score:4, Insightful)

      by chill ( 34294 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:58PM (#10365865) Journal
      1. My back yard, surrounded by the 7' privacy fence is not public yet open to scrutiny by these types of devices.

      2. Define "public". How about in your car, parked in a public street? Not in many locations. I remember a legal case in NYC where a couple was arrested for having sex in their car "in public". The courts ruled that the closed doors on the car constituted a "reasonable expectation of privacy" so "public" indecency laws didn't apply.

      How about "Illegal search and seizure". Yeah, no seizure here but a picture that good might constitute "illegal search".

      -Charles
  • I remember Opus worrying about this when Milo told him that there were Satellites that could see you doing those private unmentionable things. Opus ended up on the cover of USA Today scratching his armpit the next day. Maybe we ought to track the number of pizza's ordered by the analysis centers when Defcon, Hope, and skin fests like the Oscars happen.

  • For all you conspiracy theorists... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Aceto3for5 ( 806224 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:20PM (#10365425)
    This is basically The Sims for the NSA.

    Next thing you know you'll feel compelled to take a swim, only later you'll notice the ladder has been removed...

  • NIMAR? (Score:5, Informative)

    by andy1307 ( 656570 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:21PM (#10365437)
    The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency used to be called the National imagery and mapping agency reston. The just changed the name of the agency some time in the last 6 months. I work very close to this agency in Northern Virginia. Before 9/11, you couldn't distinguish this building from any other office block. Post 9/11, there are armed guards and security checkpoints.

  • Not only that! (Score:2, Funny)

    by holzp ( 87423 )
    But they [x10.com] spam my browser too!

  • Don't see much threat to privacy here... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by RCulpepper ( 99864 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:27PM (#10365498)
    Mapquest and Terraserver et al have been offering up USGS satellite photos for years. What they're proposing to do here is not a more intensive form of surveillance, but a more complete job of mapping. All the information retreived by this system, AFAIK, would just be used to construct, say, 3D models of public buildings and cities, all of which information is easily available to the average pedestrian.

  • Here's why I care (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DanielMarkham ( 765899 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:30PM (#10365529) Homepage
    I understand that when I am in a public venue I have no right to privacy. I think everybody understands that.

    But what bothers me is that I am losing my anonynimity. The founding fathers never thought this one through, because there were no such things as databases that could keep images of all public spaces, faces, and events and allow cross-checking. That bothers me. If I decide to go down to the visit some local political nut-job to hear what they have to say, I don't expect to be catalogued and cross-referenced, even though I am performing a public act.

    No, I have nothing to hide. And yes, I understand that everybody is nice and the government is here to help me. But last I checked, our system of government in the USA was not built upon "Aw Shucks", but a system of checks and balances that assumed that power corrupts. We seem to be forgetting this somehow.

    • Re:Here's why I care (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Sheepdot ( 211478 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:49PM (#10365755) Journal
      I understand that when I am in a public venue I have no right to privacy. I think everybody understands that.

      I don't.

      I don't understand what it is about the ninth amendment that the US Government fails to comprehend. I have a right to privacy. I would *hope* that would mean that I have a right to not have any identifying information stored in a public record if I did not desire such.

      If they suspect me of a crime, then by God, they should charge me with one. Not follow me around till I forget to signal when making a left turn. Speaking of which, why the hell do the ninth and tenth amendments never get mentioned and are repeatedly ignored? Ambiguity? What sane person could possibly imagine having your name in any database without his or her knowledge would not be a violation of their privacy?
      • What it means is that anything the government doesn't make speicifcly illegal for you to do is legal. So they can't say "Well you can't do that because we didn't make a law saying you can," they have to make a law saying you CAN'T before you aren't allowed.

        Nowhere in there is public privacy or anonymity implied or stated. I can't find anywhere in the constution that it talks about public privacy, in fact. It talks about being secure in your house, person, papers, etc which is taken to mean that your privat
  • Roughly twice a month, the agency is called upon to help with the security of events inside the United States. Even more routinely, it is asked to help prepare imagery and related information to protect against possible attacks on critical sites.

    I'm not saying that spying is good, but it'll take quite a bit before they can spy on all the Americans at the rate of twice a month.

  • Might be a nice time to mention... (Score:5, Informative)

    by daveschroeder ( 516195 ) * on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:31PM (#10365546)
    ...some of the ways we benefit [nationalmap.gov] from the work of the NGA [nga.mil]:

    National Map [nationalmap.gov] (National Map Viewer [usgs.gov])

    (and the somewhat related National Atlas [nationalatlas.gov])

  • license plates? try dirt (Score:3, Interesting)

    by spoonyfork ( 23307 ) <spoonyfork@@@gmail...com> on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:32PM (#10365564) Journal
    I own one of four cars where I work that are the same make, model, year, color, and package. The only way I can tell them apart after a long day at work (when I forget exactly where I parked) is by looking at the dirt pattern. Each vehicle is distinctive -- except when washed, obviously.
  • Close them.

    Whether or not you agree with the government doing this, feeling as if you are personally threatened by it is pretty unreasonable. The government has many high and low profile criminals to violate the rights of before they move on to the average citizen who may have some beliefs that are perceived as threatening to government or society.

    That isn't to say we should ignore questionable acts on the part of our government, but we should be realistic about their implictions. The right to privacy is
  • Great, now we're turning into England. How long do you think it'll take before the United States surpases England as the country that spies the most on its own citizenry?

    • Re:England (Score:3, Insightful)

      by mamba-mamba ( 445365 )

      Great, now we're turning into England. How long do you think it'll take before the United States surpases England as the country that spies the most on its own citizenry? [emphasis added]

      DPRK? Iran? Saudi Arabia?

      MM--

  • Use it to find and take care of meth labs.

    • Re:Put it to good use (Score:5, Interesting)

      by IceWing_mk1 ( 817030 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:57PM (#10365850)
      Well, actually there's starting to be precedent against high-tech surveillance technologies being employed in an invasive manner. A few months back, there was a case brought where a guy who was growing certain types of plants in his attic via the use of sun lamps was caught when a local LEO decided to scan the residence at night with a thermal imaging device. After the arrest of the grower, said grower brought suit, claiming it was a warrantless search, therefore inadmissible. The case went up the legal ladder to the Supreme Court, who decided that indeed, the use of the thermal imaging device violated the 4th Amendment Right's (Protection from Unlawful Search and Seizure) of the grower. Then, they turned around and said that aerial surveillance didn't need any such warrant. I'm not going to try and figure out the following, "In his discussion of the effect of the evolution of technology on privacy rights, Justice Scalia stated that technology enabling human flight has uncovered portions of the house and its curtilage that once were private. But, he held, the Kyllo case had to confront the limits on the power of technology to shrink the realm of guaranteed privacy." So, somehow, the technology of a thermal imaging device breaks some line of technology which would allow for unauthorized observation into a person's home, and therefore requires a warrant, while a radio control helicopter with a wireless camera onboard, as it would constitute aerial surveillence, doesn't. Sometimes, I think that George, Tom and the rest of the gang must be spinning in their graves.

      • Re:Put it to good use (Score:3, Informative)

        by smclean ( 521851 )
        Personally, though I'm no fan of aerial surveillance, I think that the Supreme Court made the logical call here; I believe that the rights of a law agency to surveillance without a warrant are more of less the same as the common citizenry.

        If looking into a private residence with thermal imaging devices were legal, every pervert in the world would be spending their evenings legally looking in to all the 13 year old girls' bedrooms.

        On the other hand, aerial surveillance can't really be illegal, because (

  • This is why... (Score:4, Funny)

    by eander315 ( 448340 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:36PM (#10365610)
    I have a EULA (End User License Agreement) specifically forbidding the use of any image(s) of me being used for commercial or government use taped to the top of my tin-foil hat.

  • kevin Mitnick Jr. is going to have a new toy (Score:3)

    by cyfer2000 ( 548592 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:41PM (#10365655) Journal
    kevin Mitnick Jr. is going to have a new toy, very powerful toy.

  • Most 1337! (Score:3, Funny)

    by Fear the Clam ( 230933 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:41PM (#10365658)
    For instance, the agency has modified basic maps of the nation's capital to highlight the location of hospitals, linking them to data on the number of beds or the burn unit in each

    Obviously my mad Photoshop and HTML image map skillz are needed by our government. Later, RazorFish!
  • We're safe because the department is stupid.

    "I don't think any of my people know enough to know an environmental crime," [agency official] Beaulieu said.


    I feel so much better about it now.
  • According to Executive Order 12333, signed by President Reagan in 1981, members of the U.S. intelligence community can collect, retain and pass along information about U.S. companies or people only in certain cases.

    I thought to myself: Why was this order originally imposed?

    I mean, after all, we're talking about spying on US citizens here. Turns out, the law was passed in response to the intelligence agencies already spying on citizens. Reagan, and others, wanted to establish what reasons were legitima
  • So they take aerial photos, and map out what hospitals are close to big events incase shit happens. Yea, they probably need to have stronger oversight from another agency, no oversight when dealing with this kind of data is bad. Thats about all I got out of this.

  • Whose watching them? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by eseiat ( 650560 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:46PM (#10365713) Homepage
    In the article the following quotes appear: The agency is not interested in information on U.S. citizens, stresses Americas office director Bert Beaulieu. "We couldn't care less about individuals and people and companies," he said. But that's not good enough for secrecy expert Steven Aftergood, who oversees a project on government secrecy for the Federation of American Scientists. "What it all boils down to is 'Trust us. Our intentions are good,'" he said. Considering my trust of the "good intentions" of spy satellite division of the government isn't exactly at a stellar magnitude, I want to know who is overseeing this group? Are there any regulations on this group and if so, who creates those? I'm not concerned due to any paranoia, I just want to know how much authority this group really has.
  • Uncle Sam loves Us and wants to keep Us safe. He wants to make sure you don't accidentally do or say something that hurts Us--for Our own good and for the good of The State. Praise be to Flag.
  • Spatial data is neat, tho, I think it is nice that the US Gov't does this -- and publishes the data for free. Without things like TIGER, we wouldn't exist! [wifimaps.com].

  • tinfoil hat (Score:4, Funny)

    by 5m477m4n ( 787430 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @02:58PM (#10365868) Homepage
    Looks like I'm going to need to put a wider brim on my tinfoil hat.

  • Radiation monitoring? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 27, 2004 @03:12PM (#10366050)
    What I'd like to know is are they using satellites to look for radiation where it shouldn't be (i.e. borders with Canada or Mexico and ships near coastlines)?

    Is there technology to see radiation (plutonium) signatures from space in real-time or near real-time?

    I would hope so.

  • An Oversight Committee will do the trick! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by freality ( 324306 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @03:13PM (#10366063) Homepage Journal
    Let's take a bunch of senior congressmen (the kind who get the juicy oversight committee jobs) who have long histories of spending 1/4th of our tax dollars on the largest military in history and give them the job of oversight for whizzy tech projects out of the Defense Department. Sounds like a recipe for success to me!

    Oversight is useless unless its done by and for public interest. Fat cats who regularly porkbarrel for the defense industry are not for the public interest.

  • Nude sunbathing (Score:4, Funny)

    by chiph ( 523845 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @03:16PM (#10366097)
    Guess I'd better not take this up...

    Although if Elizabeth Hurley wants to, that's OK by me.

    Chip H.

  • Outsourcing is a way around civil liberties (Score:4, Interesting)

    by paronomasia5 ( 567302 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @03:27PM (#10366205)
    I saw a talk by Steve Rambam at Hope 05. Besides a live demo of a database that freakin blew my mind (in a live demo in than 30 seconds, steve pulled up everything about a guy in the audience, including past roommates, active phone lines, and his mom's credit report using *ONLY HIS SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER*).

    his assertion is that privacy is dead, not because Big Brother in D.C. is watching, but because Big Defense Contrator is watching. The government, sick of trying to ram through legislation on what it can and can't do with data it collects on its citizens, is now sub-contracting all kinds of tasks. For example, perhaps the Feds can't do a nation-wide driver's license photo scan without inciting privacy concerns; however, if most of the states sub-contract out their photo processing to a contractor on advice from big brother, then that contractor hires itself to the big brother and sells *RESULTS* from some data mining query (but never the data itself), then big brother hasn't violated any privacy rights. Similarly for phone logs, criminal databases, airline data, medicare, drivers license, health databases, traffic tickets etc.

    he told me the name of the database we should all really be afraid of, bigger than Echelon, but i forgot its name.

    His bio for those who are interested: Steven Rambam is a licensed private investigator and the owner and CEO of Pallorium, Inc., an investigative agency with offices and affiliates throughout the world. During the past 23 years, he has conducted and coordinated investigations in more than 50 countries and in nearly every U.S. state and Canadian province. For the past 13 years, he has also been the owner and director of PallTech, an online service which provides database and investigative support services to investigative agencies, special investigative units (SIUs), and law enforcement. PallTech offers interactive and non-interactive access to nearly 600 data sources, including five major proprietary databases such as Skiptrace America and BusinessFinder America. The Skiptrace America database, which currently contains more than 5.3 billion unique records, is believed to be the largest individual reference database in the United States, excluding those databases maintained by the three U.S. credit bureaus. More than a decade ago Rambam forced the tightening of airport security in Texas airports by publicly exposing those airports' security flaws. In 1997 he exposed the presence in Canada of 162 Nazi war criminals and also conducted investigations which resulted in the prosecution and conviction of war criminals on murder charges. He is also the inspiration for "Rambam the detective" in Kinky Friedman's series of murder mysteries.

  • Keyhole just censored the White House roof (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Animats ( 122034 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @03:34PM (#10366278) Homepage
    I just noticed that Keyhole [keyhole.com] recently censored the White House. A few months ago, you could see rooftop details. Now it's all a uniform brown. They also censored both Executive Office Buildings, overpainting them with a uniform green. The Capitol and the House and Senate Office Buildings have been blurred, in an ugly, pixilated way. Not the Supreme Court, though. Or, for that matter, the Pentagon.

    If you try GlobeExplorer [globeexplorer.com], you get an uncensored image until the last two zoom levels. Then the White House turns brown.

  • Who's Watching The Other Guys? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by reallocate ( 142797 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @03:36PM (#10366297)
    Actually, the AP article does not explicitly state that this agency is directing satellites to acquire new imagery inside the U.S. Perhaps, they are, perhaps they aren't. Personally, I'm not too worried about anyone watching my public activities. If I was concerned about seeing me, I'd stay home.

    Of, course, who's going to exercise oversight of all those Russian, Chinese, French, Indian and Israeli reconn satellites?

  • NGA (Score:3, Insightful)

    by HSI_Guy ( 817038 ) on Monday September 27, 2004 @03:37PM (#10366307)
    As far as I know, the NGA doesn't operate like the CIA or FBI, in that it doesn't involve itself with surveillance of indivuals or businesses, etc directly. It basically gets tasked to geospatially analyze an area or scene. In addition to doing 3d modeling (which can be used for mission planning, etc.), (using LIDAR to map sniper vectors, etc), capabilities include identifying materials on the ground from space-based or aerial assets. (Multispectral or Hyperspectral analysis) Much of the agency's ability to analyze is derived from commercial or unclassified platforms. On the opposite side of the spectrum (pun intended), much of what national asset capabilities are used for are, in effect, as a highly accurate reference. So, when you are classifying endmembers in a hyperspectral satellite image, you use classified geo-referenced imagery to pinpoint a targeted area. Geospatial is absolutely amazing, and like the first poster stated, I can't believe more people aren't involved in it (good for me). It truly is an area that is blowing up, and offsetting the losses in other IT areas. One of the main reasons for that is that it's not only pressing buttons and coding all day long. It involves elements of programming, analysis, geography, geology, hydrology, ground-truthing (field work) and countless others. It takes alot of knowledge in many fields to be an expert. Many experts have one niche, and know relatively little in others.

  • The real value of SpySats (Score:3, Interesting)

    by CaptainTux ( 658655 ) <papillion@gmail.com> on Monday September 27, 2004 @04:10PM (#10366595) Homepage Journal
    This is a suggestion that I made to the DoD over their website the other day. It's a good example of how I believe spy and tracking technology could be used in a positive way:

    1: Implant TEMPORARY subdermal GPS enabled microchips into evern millitary and civillian person working or serving in the middle eastern hotzone (or any hotzone for that matter. But right now, it's Iraq). This will allow you to pinpoint with a very high level of precision the exact location of personnel should they be kidnapped.

    3: Rescue the hostage and have a much better chance of killing the kidnappers.

    Yes, I realize the privacy implications and the conspiracy implications of it all but, at some point, there IS a tradeoff between unabridged rights and personal and group safety.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The following is not for the weak of heart or Fundamentalists." -- Dave Barry

Close