EFF Wins Access To License Plate Reader Data To Study Law Enforcement Use 62
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the Electronic Frontier Foundation: Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Southern California (ACLU SoCal) have reached an agreement with Los Angeles law enforcement agencies under which the police and sheriff's departments will turn over license plate data they indiscriminately collected on millions of law-abiding drivers in Southern California. The data, which has been deidentified to protect drivers' privacy, will allow EFF and ACLU SoCal to learn how the agencies are using automated license plate reader (ALPR) systems throughout the city and county of Los Angeles and educate the public on the privacy risks posed by this intrusive technology. A weeks' worth of data, composed of nearly 3 million data points, will be examined.
ALPR systems include cameras mounted on police cars and at fixed locations that scan every license plate that comes into view -- up to 1,800 plates per minute. They record data on each plate, including the precise time, date, and place it was encountered. The two Los Angeles agencies scan about 3 million plates every week and store the data for years at a time. Using this data, police can learn where we were in the past and infer intimate details of our daily lives such as where we work and live, who our friends are, what religious or political activities we attend, and much more. EFF and ACLU SoCal reached the agreement with the Los Angeles Police and Sheriff's Departments after winning a precedent-setting decision in 2017 from the California Supreme Court in our public records lawsuit against the two agencies. The court held that the data are not investigative records under the California Public Records Act that law enforcement can keep secret. "After six years of litigation, EFF and ACLU SoCal are finally getting access to millions of ALPR scans that will shed light on how the technology is being used, where it's being used, and how it affects people's privacy," said EFF Surveillance Litigation Director Jennifer Lynch. "We persevered and won a tough battle against law enforcement agencies that wanted to keep this information from the public. We have a right to information about how government agencies are using high-tech systems to track our locations, surveil our neighborhoods, and collect private information without our knowledge and consent."
ALPR systems include cameras mounted on police cars and at fixed locations that scan every license plate that comes into view -- up to 1,800 plates per minute. They record data on each plate, including the precise time, date, and place it was encountered. The two Los Angeles agencies scan about 3 million plates every week and store the data for years at a time. Using this data, police can learn where we were in the past and infer intimate details of our daily lives such as where we work and live, who our friends are, what religious or political activities we attend, and much more. EFF and ACLU SoCal reached the agreement with the Los Angeles Police and Sheriff's Departments after winning a precedent-setting decision in 2017 from the California Supreme Court in our public records lawsuit against the two agencies. The court held that the data are not investigative records under the California Public Records Act that law enforcement can keep secret. "After six years of litigation, EFF and ACLU SoCal are finally getting access to millions of ALPR scans that will shed light on how the technology is being used, where it's being used, and how it affects people's privacy," said EFF Surveillance Litigation Director Jennifer Lynch. "We persevered and won a tough battle against law enforcement agencies that wanted to keep this information from the public. We have a right to information about how government agencies are using high-tech systems to track our locations, surveil our neighborhoods, and collect private information without our knowledge and consent."
Innocent (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Block radar and red light cameras.
Illegal in many jurisdiction. Automatic violation on sight, ie probably cause for a stop.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Innocent (Score:2)
Those dont work. These readers use a modified IR camera based on LIDAR tech. You need to either use Veil, or those IR emitters that wash out the plate but to the naked eye look perfectly normal.
Re: (Score:2)
Any names, links or info on those IR emitters?
Re: Innocent (Score:3)
https://www.sunflexzone.com/ [sunflexzone.com]
Is one of them.
https://www.stealthveil.com/ [stealthveil.com]
Is something that works against LIDAR. Its an IR stealth coating.
It hardly matter, private companies do a lot it (Score:4, Informative)
This is not a law enforcement specific problem.
Re:It hardly matter, private companies do a lot it (Score:4, Insightful)
Why don't you make that kind of thing illegal?
It's a serious question, why does the US allow it when many other countries do not? It is just that the law has not kept pace with technology or is there some political or philosophical reason?
Re: (Score:2)
Why don't you make that kind of thing illegal?
It's a serious question, why does the US allow it when many other countries do not? It is just that the law has not kept pace with technology or is there some political or philosophical reason?
I guess it is a question of what is actually being violated.
A lot of our toll roads are now using license plate recognition. It works rather well. No stopping or slowing down, you just drive. You don't have to worry about having the right change, or where your EZ-Pass is.
But the matter of some corrupt red light cam operators is separate for the "privacy" violations. Red light cams here are operated by humans that feel the need to increase profits, so there is a impetus to shorten yellow lights of just
Re: (Score:3)
Toll roads can use number plates in Europe too, but they can only use the data for billing purposes. No marketing, no selling it. Data has to be deleted as soon as possible.
You have to opt in too, by driving on that road and seeing all the signs. Not like the bounty hunter example.
Re: (Score:2)
Toll roads can use number plates in Europe too, but they can only use the data for billing purposes. No marketing, no selling it. Data has to be deleted as soon as possible.
You have to opt in too, by driving on that road and seeing all the signs. Not like the bounty hunter example.
How do you know it isn't saved? I want that data saved, because I want to have access to if if needed. That's willful destruction of evidence.
I've never found data that can't be helpful if it can be retrieved. My best example is many years ago, I saved my employer millions in a patent dispute because I was the only person involved with verifiable date that proved we were first. I've saved every email I've ever received or sent. It gets used all of the time for group forensics.
But that's the strange th
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I thought the people opposed to legal marijuana were the drug companies and the "Thou shalt not" crowd.
Some - but if you are making millions selling it because it is illegal, you'll be opposed to legal sales as well. Business decision, as it were.
I'm about convinced that some of the "Thou shalt not" crowd might be tapping into the profits of illegal sales.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
First Amendment. No one can stop me from collecting publicly viewable data in public. License plates are publicly viewable.
You might want to check the various state laws before being so confident about that. Who knows, though, maybe you've got a case that'll make it to the SCOTUS.
http://www.ncsl.org/research/t... [ncsl.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Wait what (Score:5, Insightful)
They need to violate privacy to protect it?
Re: (Score:2)
The information was ALREADY COLLECTED IN WAYS THAT MAY VIOLATE PRIVACY LAW. The EFF is asking to see the information collected; it's no more a violation of privacy than any attempt at oversight of corrupt practices is itself corruption.
New definition of Expectation of Privacy (Score:2)
The erosion of privacy should result in changes to the law. Until electronic surveillance reached the current stage with all sorts of automatic recognition like facial, gait and license plates, people had an expectation of privacy in the form of anonymity. Nobody could trace someone else unless they actually literally followed them or installed a radio transmitter, which normally would have a limited time span too.
And absolutely nobody could do a retroactive trace — at least not unless somebody has in
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody could trace someone else unless they actually literally followed them or installed a radio transmitter
.....unless they read the unique identifier bolted to the outside of the vehicle.
Granted, the scale of data collection creates new problems that should be legislated, but it wasn't like we were actually anonymous while driving before now.
Re: (Score:2)
.....unless they read the unique identifier bolted to the outside of the vehicle.
Actually not really, as anonymity is a relative concept.
To trace an individual before automation became really feasible, you would have to dedicate people who would follow/shadow the specific individual. And if you wanted to do it surreptitiously and for longer periods, quite a few people.
Also, you could not easily go back in time and find out where that individual had been, say, a week ago or a month ago, as you would have to manually go through droves of surveillance videos. And going further back than a
EFF is so lucky (Score:2)
I was dreaming about having access to plates reader info. I would love to collect plates myself from my car just to analyze the heck out of them.
Re:EFF is so lucky (Score:4, Informative)
Go do it. OpenALPR is available and works on a Raspberry PI. I use it all the time.
Privacy and progress at odds (Score:5, Interesting)
This is one of the nuanced areas where it would really help to have privacy laws that specifically target privacy rather than the collection of data. With data you can do so much both in terms of optimisation as well as safety. However the presence of this data presents a privacy risk.
Somehow laws need to be written to protect privacy and yet allow data to improve the way we live at the same time. This is going to freak out Americans but in the Netherlands license plates are scanned constantly all the time for a variety of purposes, some for safety, some for environmental, and some for optimisation.
e.g.
- Safety - Don't try to drive an unregistered car in the Netherlands. It will be a very short adventure that nets you a nice fine.
- Environmental - I drove in Germany in an environmental zone for a good 6 months before someone told me I needed a green sticker on my windshield to drive in the zone I did. I never got a fine, despite breaking the law daily. In Rotterdam they introduced a system where they simply scan your license plate and compare it against a database. In many places when you enter the city the license plate flashes up on a sign and you get either a green tick or a red cross along with an instruction to turn around or risk a fine.
- Optimisation - I got a letter one day telling me that my car was logged in peak hour every work day on the same nasty highway and as such I was invited to join a peak hour avoidance scheme. I was given 120EUR a month in an escrow account and every time I my car was detected in peak hour 3EUR were deducted from that account. At the end of the month I received the balance. Doesn't sound like much but that scheme actually made a huge difference to traffic on that highway during peak hour, and best of all traffic remained improved after the scheme stopped as people got used to getting to work later or earlier.
There's so much we can do with data, but man it's risky to have that much info if you distrust your government.
Re: (Score:2)
License plates have been scanned regularly for many years in the US. Not sure why people are freaking out about it now. How did they think automatic tolls or red light/speeding camera fines worked?
Re: Privacy and progress at odds (Score:2)
"How did they think automatic tolls or red light/speeding camera fines worked?"
By creating massive, unamerican surveillance databases for the gestapo?
Re: (Score:2)
People have faces. When they go out in public it is expected that people will see them and be able to identify them, both where they are, and where they have been. They are in PUBLIC. Their identity is not meant to be secret.
And yet people seem to think that, if their car is indistinguishable from many others, they have a right to be totally unobserved, even when they a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What the hell is an "environmental zone"?
What does this have to do with driving a car somewhere?
Re: (Score:2)
This means in heavily populated areas there is a need to limit traffic, usually by banning the older diesel engined cars or even some older cars running on gasoline.
A EU problem is every country or even city has it's own implementation...
Re: (Score:2)
Wow....
I couldn't deal with a government body telling where/when I could drive somewhere.
That would NOT fly in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, these places typically have very good public transport so the need for a car is limited.
Re: (Score:2)
I couldn't deal with a government body telling where/when I could drive somewhere.
So I take it you got in your parent's car as a 12 year old and went on your merry way while drunk out of your mind?
Every government body in the world has restrictions in place on driving, including where/when (one way roads, road closures, when you are old enough and have a current license).
Not just where and when as well, but also who (license holders), what (roadworthy tests), and how (speed limits).
Driving is not a right, and it is "flying in the US" on a daily basis. Notice how CARB tests prevent certai
Re: (Score:2)
No. Never seen or heard of this.
If you have a car that is licensed to drive in your state, you can go anywhere you want with it (public roads, which we all can drive on).
The rest of your example was a bit inane.
Yes, you have too be old enough and have a drivers license if you want to be on public roads (restrictions now there if driving on private property by the way).....but there are no restrictions
Re: (Score:2)
And yet you have to pass CARB tests for your CA car to be allowed in CA. Just because you found a loop hole or workaround doesn't make the point any less valid. You CANNOT just drive whatever the fuck you want where you want it. There are restrictions in place.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, we do have a few such laws.
Gross polluter laws allow the police to stop vehicles which are visibly polluting (belching clouds of smoke) and cite them or impound the vehicles for pollution violations.
Local noise ordinances are frequently enforced on those who have modified their exhaust (straight pipes, etc.) I have personally seen cars show up at auto shows/meet ups and be impounded for violations of noise laws.
But in general you are correct. Just because a car doesn't meet California emissions
Re: (Score:2)
What the hell is an "environmental zone"?
Sensitive areas usually heavily built up with large populations that could suffer negative effects of pollution.
What does this have to do with driving a car somewhere?
Huge populations with huge amounts of cars generate huge amounts of pollution in an area where the aforementioned huge population is exposed and as such it is hugely important to limit this effect. As such many countries in Europe ban vehicles that don't meet stricter emissions standards from heavily built up areas:
https://urbanaccessregulations... [urbanacces...lations.eu]
Düsseldorf, Germany: Diesels need to meet Eur
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah my point exactly. We should protect data and the people that data is about that could be useful to use to improve our lives. Not ban the collection of data. But that requires a certain level of trust in the government.
Re: (Score:2)
There's so much we can do with data, but man it's risky to have that much info if you distrust your government.
If you dont distrust your govt history has some lessons for you
Re: (Score:2)
If you dont distrust your govt history has some lessons for you
Yes, history about a few select governments would, which is precisely why many modern governments have checks and balances in place to make them trustworthy.
People don't realise just how much they trust their government because of the illusion (delusion?) that they somehow have power over it.
Good to catch non-criminals (Score:2)
"They record data on each plate, including the precise time, date, and place it was encountered. "
But do they also record the photograph?
If not, we could just swap plates.
Like the criminals do which they don't catch.
This data ist just sold for money to the repo-man, the bounty hunter, ICE, and whatnot, either by the brass or illegally by the lower ranks.
Re: Good to catch non-criminals (Score:1)
Much cheaper to get that info off all the private companies collecting and abusing this data. The state has little incentive to focus on individuals. Companies make money off them.
Re: (Score:2)
Much cheaper to get that info off all the private companies collecting and abusing this data. The state has little incentive to focus on individuals. Companies make money off them.
You've got it wrong. You bribe, er, donate to the police to collect all this data for your company then use/sell that as you see fit, outsourcing the collection costs to the taxpayers. Then you just offer the police chief or whoever a spot on your board or a "consulting" job after they retire.
Re: Good to catch non-criminals (Score:2)
When the law is corrupt, corruption is lawful.
Expectation of privacy?? (Score:1)
This is a tough issue - exactly how much expectation of privacy is realistic for anyone driving a vehicle? By law, the vehicle has to be registered (public data), the roads are built and maintained with public money (taxes) by public organizations (governments). Taking the privacy concerns of drivers too far would leave the responsible citizen who reports a vehicle (description and license plate) for dangerous or suspected drunk driving open to legal action for violating the privacy of the apparently irre
Re: Expectation of privacy?? (Score:2)
In Soviet America (and other totalitarian countries), one has zero expectation of privacy.
Sigh (Score:2)
This sounds similar to the eye in the sky, which takes a high res photo every few seconds so they can go back and visit crime scenes and track vehicles to and from it.
Both of which sound great, except there goes freedom and not being under examination. Without great safeguards on access and logging, what's to stop misuse on political rivals or just people someone hates or wants affair leverage over?
Not private information (Score:2)
license plate information, when collected on public streets, isn't private information. nothing you do in public is private information.
Re: (Score:3)
This is 100% correct. But the concern is that all this ALPR data, sufficiently aggregated, could be used to derive personal habits (religious affiliation, sexual preference, relationships, etc.) and other stuff considered private information.
So the issue isn't so much the collection of data, but the regulation of the storage and use of the data.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is 100% correct. But the concern is that all this ALPR data, sufficiently aggregated, could be used to derive personal habits (religious affiliation, sexual preference, relationships, etc.) and other stuff considered private information.
So the issue isn't so much the collection of data, but the regulation of the storage and use of the data.
This is sensitive information, as it could be misused. It is not private information.
Re: (Score:2)
As the laws stand, you are right.
I think we will have to redefine the concept of expectation of privacy, as today's technology has made it possible to aggregate information gleaned from public spaces that goes far beyond what was possible at the turn of the millennium.
The no expectation of privacy in public spaces has actually been eroded as historically no-one could realistically track everyone in public. These days that is no longer true (at least for heavily surveilled areas) and the law should be update