Cyber News 015
Good morning, humans.
It’s 0511 my time, and I’m trolling through my Google news feed. I haven’t had any coffee yet, and there is a twinge in my gut that feels suspiciously like my old hernia. In short, I feel old.
//
In NYC, Zohran Mandani has been elected Mayor. This is only relevant to my line of work because of the extensive surveillance state it puts him at the head of. The linked article is a Wired piece that lists many of NYC’s capabilities, including but not limited to:
Security cameras and license plate readers
“Gunshot” audio detectors
Body and dashcam streams
Biometric databasing
A growing drone observation program
All of that and more are networked together with Microsoft tools to form the Domain Awareness System (DAS) for the NYPD.
The Wired article seems primarily concerned with the fact that Mamdani, notoriously “anti-police” is not immediately taking action to replace the NYPD Commissioner. That, to me, is far less of a concern than the existence and proliferation of the surveillance itself.
Surveillance technology is morally similar to a firearm—it’s neither good nor bad on it’s own, but rather it depends on how it’s used. The problem then, is in how much capability we want our LE and government to have.
Who should we trust with a panoptic stream of information? “Those currently in power” is, to me, a terrible answer. Most government administrations are quick to expand their own capabilities, often with the implicit blessing of their constituency. But how deeply do we think through the consequences of then handing off that capability to the next administration?
New Yorkers need to examine how much power they’re willing to give their new Mayor-elect, and how on Earth they allowed themselves to be put in this state even before him.
//
Bear those principles in mind when considering this next story, also from wired. The DHS has been, for several years, been funneling DNA samples of citizens and immigrants alike en masse to the FBI’s CODIS database.
The DHS’ approach here is reminiscent of most non-governmental data collection schemes. They’re driving the program like they stole it, hoovering up a maximal amount of data while no one is stopping them. If they ever get in trouble for that, they know full-well it will likely just be a slap on the wrist.
The implication of this database, and the fact that it is tracking individuals as young as 4, is disturbing for future policing. It’s very likely that individuals who are already in CODIS may face profiling if they are suspected of a crime later in life. This is especially concerning given the push that Police Departments and other LE agencies face to adopt AI systems into their workflow.
Serious breaches in due process may occur as we increasingly trust machines and databases to “make” judgement calls that will effect the trajectory of the rest of a person’s life.
