Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
IBM Hardware

DVRs for Cop Cars 368

Posted by michael from the season-pass dept.
AEton writes "News.com is reporting that IBM is developing digital video recorders for cop cars. The systems involve a digital video camera and reusable hard drives which police officers will take with them on their shifts; centralized servers with up to 3.5 TB of storage will hold recordings. The cameras continuously record and cache old video in a "Tivo-like" fashion; tapes will start from three to five minutes before the cop turned on the recorder. Unbiased, high-quality recording could have a compelling social effect; and at the very least, we're headed for HDTV Cops."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

DVRs for Cop Cars More

DVRs for Cop Cars

Comments Filter:

  • "The cameras continuously record and cache old video in a Tivo-like fashion; tapes will start from three to five minutes before the cop turned on the recorder."

    Not sure I understand, this means that after you press "record", the DVR travels three to five minutes backward in time and catches you in the loo a few minutes prior? Surely the video would spool to disk 3 to 5 minutes after it was recorded. Maybe I can use one of these after I get pulled over for speeding to travel back in time and brake in advance...

    • Re:Einstein would be impressed. (Score:5, Informative)

      by Aviancer ( 645528 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @02:50PM (#5966472) Homepage Journal
      An interesting concept, but no.. what they're pointing out is that the video would be run ALL THE TIME, and discarded after 5 minutes. When the cop presses "record" the machine would save the video from 5 minutes before the record button was pressed in addition to all the current video until the "stop recording" command is sent.

      • Gaming the Recorder and Black Boxes (Score:5, Interesting)

        by hndrcks ( 39873 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @03:18PM (#5966771) Homepage
        After reading everyone's suggestions on how a policeman who did something questionable might want to 'game the system'; i.e., get the disc to record over the problem moments...

        I wonder what will happen when they put REALLY big drives in these things that record the whole shift. More police cars unfortunately running off the road and exploding in flames, I suppose (with the drivers miraculously saved.)

        Another thing that came to mind - this device could be the equivalent of a 'black box' on an airplane - you could have BlueTooth enabled guns / batons, health montoring devices in the uniform... this could bring a whole new level of evidence to bear in a Rodney-King style event. What if the police could show from a EKG strip that the cop really was scared for his life? Interesting stuff...

        • The outcome I really hope to see is tied to the "record when the flashers are turned on". Currently, cops who get tired of obeying all of those tedious traffic laws they ticket everyone else for just flash the lights, get past the blockage, then turn off the lights and go on with their lives. Logging each and every use of emergency signals will cut down this abuse - if they have to justify why they hit the shiny red button, they will probably stop hitting it unless it really is needed.

          I'm pretty pro-poli

      • Did this where I worked (Score:4, Interesting)

        by phorm ( 591458 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @03:29PM (#5966865) Journal
        Basically we had a system hooked up to a digital camera that recorded to temporary files. If something tripped off a sensor, it was configured to save the previous X moments of video rather than dumping the cache file. Really, it makes sense, since for spontaneous events you really want what happened to get your attention, not necessarily what happens afterwards (or both).

        As for the duration of recording... wouldn't it be nice if the recordings weren't viewable by the officers on duty. That way, it could be juggled to a little over 5 minutes (or a lot over), and anyone trying to "wait out" before pressing record would be S.O.L.

    • Re:Einstein would be impressed. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Xentax ( 201517 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @02:51PM (#5966482)
      Um, it sounds like the *central* tape will start from 3-5 minutes before the cop "actually" turns recording on -- just so they make sure they get a bit more than just what the cop feels like needs to be seen.

      I don't really think this is a keep-the-cop-honest feature, because there are much better ways to go about it than that. I think it's just to help establish the context in which the cop used the recorder.

      Xentax
    • You obviously haven't seen TiVo. It's constantly recording the current channel, you can rewind even without explicitly pressing record. These would apparently work the same.

    • Re:Einstein would be impressed. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 15, 2003 @02:53PM (#5966491)
      It means that video is continuously recorded, with the oldest video overwritten, and that when you press "record", you don't really start recording. Instead, you just mark a spot in the video stream, and the software takes the time three (or five) minutes previously as the "start" time. Those video bits wouldn't then get recycled.

      Makes sense. You're only going to hit "record" after figuring out something interesting is going on, and you can't hit the button immediately.
    • Not sure I understand, this means that after you press "record", the DVR travels three to five minutes backward in time and catches you in the loo a few minutes prior? Surely the video would spool to disk 3 to 5 minutes after it was recorded. Maybe I can use one of these after I get pulled over for speeding to travel back in time and brake in advance...

      Basically the box will be continually recording into a looped buffer. When you hit the record button it will retrive the last 5 minutes from the buffer and

  • Excellent idea... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by xinit ( 6477 ) <rmurray@@@foo...ca> on Thursday May 15, 2003 @02:48PM (#5966447) Homepage
    If you believe the paranoids, this will make it ever easier to generate evidence on the fly, without havingt o go to the extra step of encoding all that raw tape.

    • Re:Excellent idea... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by einer ( 459199 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @02:58PM (#5966540) Journal
      Which is why DRM is NOT a "bad" technology. It would make the above scenario impossible.
      • It would make the above scenario impossible.

        I think you meant it would make the above situation difficult...
    • Nothing worse than getting a fucking ticket from some damn rural cop who says your going faster than you are. Speed (cruise) control does a pretty good job of keeping me aware of my actual speed, instead of lying cops making money for BFE Oklahoma.

      Although I could fabricate evidence on my own! Hmmm.....

      • Re:I want one. (Score:3, Interesting)

        by K-Man ( 4117 )
        It seems like a cheap "this is what really happened" camera would be a boon for people on the road, and insurance companies, etc., would save a lot of litigation of the "I didn't rear end him, he backed into me on the freeway" kind.

        I know there's one guy in New York who rides a bike with cameras fore and aft, but I think they're on a conventional portable VTR.

  • Sweet. (Score:2, Funny)

    by grub ( 11606 )

    There'll be a black market for geeks to hack these things so the cops can switch them off and not be caught hitting on hookers for "favours".
    • There'll be a black market for geeks to hack these things so the cops can switch them off and not be caught hitting on hookers for "favours".

      Yeah, well, if the system is built in such a way as there's a checksum value for the recording sent and stored at a separate location, this could be impossible to do. Modifying a tape signature is one thing, making it match an unknown quantity at a verification/validation site, which logs hits, could make such a thing beyond possibility. More like, "Clancy, now did

      • The major downside is probably more video of people at their utter worst prior to and during arrest, a la Cops

        er, and how is this a downside? video of people at their utter worst is great entertainment. cops is the most enjoyable when the people are most insane. Psychoanalyze if you must, but I like it.

    • Re:Sweet. (Score:3, Funny)

      by Soko ( 17987 )
      There'll be a black market for geeks to hack these things so the cops can switch them off and not be caught hitting on hookers for "favours".

      What? Some smart person would make them leave it on, so the boys in blue get a new revenue source. Internet pr0n generates lots of cash...

      Come to think of it, there's lots of way they could reduce the tax burden that way.

      - www.Rate-A-Ho.com
      - www.Catch-your-hubby-in-the-act.org
      - www.How-does-my-college-age-daughter-get-her-$BLI N G$.biz
      - www.Hugh-Grant-up-close-and-

  • Will this be used fairly... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Gortbusters.org ( 637314 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @02:49PM (#5966456) Homepage Journal
    Or can cops turn it off when they wanna go Rodney King on someone's ass
    • Imagine several years from now, when most police departments have this system, and routinely record everything. Along comes a case like Rodney King, arrest is made, flashing lights, radio calls, etc ... and the recorder wasn't running. Pretty damning evidence, I'd say. Th epublic will say so too, the lawsuits will be settled for bih chunks of change, and the bad cops will at the very least have to be a lot more careful and pick their rage times more carefully. They will either leave the force, or hold t
    • As a matter of fact, typically these video systems are used in the opposite manner, when people (or groups whose agendas require police brutality in order to advance) make false claims. The videos then refute the perjured testimony.

      Also, our police chase shows will have much better quality, which can only be an improvement.

  • We Need Good Watermarking (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AlabamaMike ( 657318 ) * on Thursday May 15, 2003 @02:49PM (#5966462) Journal
    It strikes me that a really good watermarking technology is needed before this type of technology will be truly trustworthy. Imagine a Rodney King scenario, but since the cops have it on digital video they could "edit in" some attack footage before the beating starts. Call me paranoid, but it would be possible.
    A.M.

    • Re:We Need Good Watermarking (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Pharmboy ( 216950 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @02:57PM (#5966534) Journal
      It strikes me that a really good watermarking technology is needed before this type of technology will be truly trustworthy. Imagine a Rodney King scenario, but since the cops have it on digital video they could "edit in" some attack footage before the beating starts. Call me paranoid, but it would be possible.

      It would be pretty damn hard to 'edit in' the person striking first, but there is an easier way. The cops can just carry a bulk tape eraser and a power inverter for the cig lighter, then wipe out the hard drive after they get midevil on someone's ass. Or a 5# speaker magnet. That should cook the hard drive if used properly. Then just say "I dunno what happened to the system, it should be there to prove I didn't do anything".
      • If you have a freshly erased videotape and a freshly beaten-to-death handcuffed suspect on the ground in front of you, you're going to have a difficult time explaining that particular coincidence.
      • Sorry, won't work. The data can and WILL be retrieved if tampering is suspected. Anything short of physical destruction leaves the data fairly easily recoverable if you have the right equipment. I doubt any decent defense attourney would fail to have the disk sent out to a data recovery service if tampering is suspected.

    • Re:We Need Good Watermarking (Score:5, Interesting)

      by NanoGator ( 522640 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @03:00PM (#5966569) Homepage Journal
      "Imagine a Rodney King scenario, but since the cops have it on digital video they could "edit in" some attack footage before the beating starts. Call me paranoid, but it would be possible. "

      Paranoid. :)

      First off, if you do the math, it's about 700 megs per hour of footage, as opposed the 13 gig it'd take to losslessly compress it. In order to edit somebody in, the video'd have to be recompressed, and that would be noticable upon analysis.

      Secondly, it is *very* hard to digitally add/replace somebody in a video. Professional studios have difficulty doing thing, it's inconcievable that the police could cover something up that way. They wouldn't have the talent on their own and the money needed to do it enough to not raise eyebrows would raise eyebrows.

      It'd actually be easier to pull that off with plain old VHS camcorders. You can duplicate them without too much quality loss. (Or at least noticable.) The video's lower res and fuzzier so it'd be easy to mask effects. The higher the resolution and color accuracy of video, the harder it is to satisfactorally match it.

      I wouldn't worry.
      • more importantly, it is EASY to convince some fellow cops to protect you. It is VERY difficult to convince someone with that good computer skills not to squeal to the Press.
    • That's my fear too. For most things this wouldn't happen...but with DV editing getting more and more advanced it may become impossible to tell if something is real or an edit. Let's happen to say you're a political activist the government is after you....all they have to do is make aa tape like this and it's over.

      I hope we never become so reliant on technology like this we refuse to use common sense. Many unforseen dangers may lye ahead for us.

      At the same time, perhaps this video will show some of the

    • It strikes me that a really good watermarking technology is needed before this type of technology will be truly trustworthy. Imagine a Rodney King scenario, but since the cops have it on digital video they could "edit in" some attack footage before the beating starts. Call me paranoid, but it would be possible.

      Wouldn't it be easier for the cops to simply not record the offending event in the first place? In the case of Rodney King, it was a third party recording that got them into trouble. Though on

    • What would be even better is if they had the footage of Rodney King at all of his criminal convictions, or maybe how he was drinking that night, or maybe as the police tried to subdue him using pepper spray and stun guns...
    • Funny the Rodney King scenario is mentioned...of course we all know that Rodney King attacked the police, who then delivered the beating. We all know this, right? It's what really happened.
    • It strikes me that a really good watermarking technology is needed before this type of technology will be truly trustworthy.

      Or good DRM.
    • The only reason there was a Rodney King video was because some passer by with a video camera took the recording without the police noticing. Analogue video tape would be just as easy to get rid of as digital video, and faking analogue video is no more difficult than faking digital video - just record the fake digital video using your VCR.
    • This concept has been around for a few years. In some railroad locomotives, virtually identical devices have been installed. They look out the front window of the locomotive, and also record whistle noises. This way, when Joe Sixpack says to the judge "Honest, he didn't blow the whistle, I didn't see him coming," they can pop the tape in and see that Joe pulled up to the railroad crossing, looked right at the train, and then decided to make a run for it before getting pulverized by the train, while the w

  • 30-second skip? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Wesley Felter ( 138342 ) <wesley@felter.org> on Thursday May 15, 2003 @02:49PM (#5966465) Homepage
    Yes, but will there be a secret code that you can type into the remote to enable the all-important 30-second skip feature?

  • Awesome! (Score:5, Funny)

    by TopShelf ( 92521 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @02:51PM (#5966484) Homepage Journal
    Just gotta remember my EMP when driving about.

  • I can see it now. (Score:5, Funny)

    by American AC in Paris ( 230456 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @02:53PM (#5966494) Homepage
    "...well yeah, Bill, I really like the new TivoCop Recorders they issued us, but I swear mine thinks I'm racist or somthing--you should see what it puts in my "Favorite Citations" list..."

  • excellent! (Score:4, Funny)

    by simpl3x ( 238301 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @02:54PM (#5966514)
    "cops" will now be in high definition. will they record the busts in surround sound too?
  • Uh, how well do hard disk drives actually work when in the trunk of a car involved in a high speed chase? This brings new meaning to the phrase "head crash", doesn't it? Seems like the lower-tech VCR would be more reliable in this case...
  • ...Until they put digital cameras embedded on the foreheads of the cops themselves.

  • About Time (Score:3, Informative)

    by rumpledstiltskin ( 528544 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @02:56PM (#5966526) Homepage Journal
    This kind of thing Long [utexas.edu] overdue [join-hands.com] in Austin [indymedia.org]
    • You know, you can't spell "stupid" without UTPD.

      Also, the Lacresha Murray was broken by the New York Times, and we all know what kind of reporting they're capable of.

  • I've been coming up with an in-car multi-angled record to HDD system to. Only mine was because of cops, help me to get out of tickets like the one that speed trapped me from behind a line of bushes last week. I was planing to use Freevo or simular, a notebook some webcams and wireless lan so if the car got jacked I could get pictures of the driver and their surroundings. I was also trying to figure out how to get a finger print scanner hidden in an unsuspecting place, like the gear shift.
    • "I've been coming up with an in-car multi-angled record to HDD system to"
      "I was planing to use Freevo or simular, a notebook some webcams and wireless lan"
      " I was also trying to figure out how to get a finger print scanner hidden in an unsuspecting place, like the gear shift."

      Batman, you should really start posting anonymously.

    • Me, too! I was planning on using a conical mirror to record 360 degrees. My reason for using it would be to:
      1. Show my insurance company that the other guy really did drive into my car.
      2. Show the cops what a particular idiot did.
      3. Use my ham license to transmit the video on demand via 440/1200 Mhz, to catch-a-thief.
      I would _love_ to have this stored encrypted and incorruptable, so that it'd be admissible in court _and_ so that cops would write tickets based on it.

      • Ham, thats better than my plan of just hoping they dropped by a Star Bucks or an open node and have the Wi-Fi upload to an FTP server like mad. I also considered a cellular card, communications was my biggest concern.

        The nice thing about recording it yourself:

        If it doesn't benefit you, you don't have to volunteer the evidence.
    • How would this get you out of tickets? I wasn't aware that speeding was legal if the cop hides behind bushes. Or even if he isn't there at all, for that matter.

      • Speeding isn't legal, cop or not.

        Speed trapping isn't legal in most states (hidden out of view)

        Two wrongs doesn't make a right but you might be able squirell your way out of a fine with it. That and having a video record of someone side swiping me was slightly more important.

  • Already on Motorcycles (Score:5, Informative)

    by theonetruekeebler ( 60888 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @02:57PM (#5966537) Homepage Journal
    A motorcycle is a rather space-constrained and high-vibration environment, and a conventional tape-based system simply wouldn't cut it. A company here in Wheat Ridge, CO has done several installations for the Colorado State Patrol's Harleys. They also borrowed a BMW R1150RTP from us and did a demo installation on it.

    The system works just as described: The system is always recording to a programmable-length buffer; once the officer cuts his disco lights on, the buffer becomes a permanent file and current events are appended to it.

    I didn't ask any questions about how easy it was to erase files off the system, but I remember seeing a keypad on the unit and the guy I brought the bike to did enter a code before he got into any of the menus. It would be easy enough give those codes to the station chiefs, but not the patrol officers.

  • Lights, Camera,... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Joe the Lesser ( 533425 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @02:57PM (#5966538) Homepage Journal
    Unbiased, high-quality recording could have a compelling social effect;

    Unfortunatly, I somewhat doubt these will be available to the public w/o editing.

    • Re:Lights, Camera,... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Jerf ( 17166 )
      Unfortunatly, I somewhat doubt these will be available to the public w/o editing.

      Unfortunately? Sure would violate the privacy of anybody pulled over, esp. anybody who wasn't actually guilty. The police officer should be accountable, but the detainees, who may be completely innocent, should be protected too.
  • Uh huh...

    "You're under arrest! Please step behind the cop car, away from the cam... er, the headlights."

  • "tapes will start from three to five minutes before the cop turned on the recorder."

    The cop should not have to do anything for it to record: there should be some automatic method, like the car door opening.

    Yes, they'll get a lot of donut shop footage, but heck, otherwise, the cop could just not turn the thing on, nightstick the hell out of someone, then just drive off.

    • Re:A See a Loophole (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ctr2sprt ( 574731 )
      The cameras come on with the cruiser's lights and siren. So there's your automatic method.

      I don't think the primary purpose of this camera is to keep cops honest. I think it may occasionally have that effect, but the cops can always find some way to disable or destroy it. But that's OK, because really, the majority of cops are pretty clean. The cameras will be most useful as evidence against people the cops arrest.

      I'm one of those pathetic losers who watches all the police chase shows, and in one a

  • Tonight on "COPS:DE (digitally edited)" (Score:4, Funny)

    by Sunkist ( 468741 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @03:06PM (#5966631) Homepage

    You...doing shit you didn't.

  • Chase imagry will be much crisper on 'Worlds Worst Drivers part 500,000'...
  • Does this mean that girls that get out of speeding tickets, coupled with these fancy new cameras, will finally make www.copblowjobs.com a reality?
  • I predict that we're not too far off from the day when we'll equip our kids with tiny cameras to wear on their lapels, wire them for sound, wirelessly connect it all to a 40GB IBM microdrive in their pocket which contains all needed circuitry to capture and compress the incoming stream. Then we send them off to school with it. When they get home, we can review the footage indexed by spoken keywords and time, and get a complete and accurate view of their day.

    This kind of technology will also be extended

  • I don't like where this is headed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Dr. Spork ( 142693 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @03:24PM (#5966822)
    I'm not a cop and I probably wouldn't be good at it if I tried. But seriously, what reasonable person would accept a job where every single move you make is recorded on high-resolution camera and reviewed by the chief downtown?

    I will tell you a secret: people goof off sometimes when they work. One example: I bet at least a third of comments posted here during the day were written by people "on the clock." If you think there is something "wrong" with that, screw you. In western countries, we do enough work, goofing off and all.

    It pisses me off that it's exactly the public servants who absolutely need to be competent who are eating the brunt of our "accountability on the job" insanity. Public school teachers and cops are perfect examples: We don't pay either very well, and both are losing more and more flexibility each year. It seems like in the USA, you are probably "down-and-out" with a liberal arts degree if you become a school teacher, and to become a cop, you are probably a complete asshole who trips on power because nobody liked you in high school. That's because no one in their right minds would work these jobs with "purer" motivations.

    This is not how it should be! We should be making these public professions attractive to reasonable, intelligent people! Instead, it seems we just make them crappier every year with new restrictions and new Orwellian "accountability" measures.

    If this doesn't bother you, ask yourself this: how would you feel about your job if every single thing you do were recorded on digital video, and then reviewed? We might be heading to a world like that in our constant obsession with economic growth. We will have paid video reviewers who are themselves videoed and reviewed by other reviewers.

    • If I post on Slashdot, yap at the (I wish we had one) water cooler about the previous nights events, oh just plain slept at my desk, nothing major would change in the world.

      If a cop goofs off, people could be hurt or in certain cases die.

      There is a huge difference in the line of work that most of "us" do and being a cop, and I would think that it takes a certain kind of person to dedicate their lives to serving and protecting the innocent.

    • If theyll stop holding me to their orwellian laws. If they dont like having a camera following them everywhere, well, too bad. Stop putting up your fucking spy cameras on every corner, stop with those redlight cameras that are there only to generate money.

      I dont like being watched by camera all the time either.

  • Scenarios (Score:2, Insightful)

    by bitspotter ( 455598 )
    some possibilities to be thought about:

    1) broadcasting the video.

    These are public officials. As long as you've got their activites on video, why not broadcast them in the same way their radio signals are?

    The same reason cops are using encrypted channels: "Safety". Supposedly being able to monitor the activities of a public official puts their life at risk. The alternative, however, is an unaccountable public official. Which is worse?

    If my tax dollars are paying for these cameras, then they're paying for
  • tapes will start from three to five minutes before the cop turned on the recorder.

    The cop should never "turn on the recorder". In a world with growing police abuse, this recorder should always be on, making a record that accurately records what happened at all times, not just when the cop turns on the recorder. Current video technology and hard drive size certainly could allow for a 24 hour capture and a download to the central server (that 3.4 terabyte does seem small for video for a fleet of cars though

    • and youre boss should use key loggers, email sniffers, remote video views and have a camera in your cube to.

      Yes cops are in a unique position as public servants, but they're still people and they still deserve the right there of.

  • The systems involve a digital video camera and reusable hard drives which police officers will take with them on their shifts

    Where can I get one of these new-fangled reusable hard drives? Image a Beowulf...

  • HDTV Cops (Score:2, Funny)

    by Phredd ( 15463 )
    You can always tell who is going to get arrested while watching COPS. Its simple. It is the guy who is NOT wearing a shirt.

  • Constant recording and the effects of downtime (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Thing 1 ( 178996 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @03:40PM (#5966968) Journal
    My vote is for them to constantly be recording, and save older recordings to DVD-R (if the hard drives start to fill up). With the rapid advance of hard drives (there was an article here saying they improved 10,000-fold over the last decade or so, IIRC), and the opposite advances in video compression (DIVX/XVID et al), there should be no reason not to record everything.

    Then it will be mighty suspicious if a cop's video "suddenly breaks." Perhaps two independent recorders would be called for?

    My wife was visiting a friend in Brazil recently, and they were staying at a hotel. Her friend was accosted one night by a security guard who had red eyes and was acting funny (likely he smoked pot), and hit on her and put his arm against the wall, blocking her path. He followed her up to her room.

    She has a friend who is a cop, and he was with her that night just prior to dropping her off; he has the receipt from the restaurant they ate at, marking the exact time they left, and they went directly to the hotel. Strangely, ALL VIDEO stopped working that night.

    Which is actually better for my wife's friend: now the hotel has broken two laws, a sexual harassment as well as a federal law of destroying evidence. I hope she wins.

    We're entering the strage era of having no privacy outside the home (and little privacy inside, as cops use thermal imaging to detect tomato growers). If we're going to record, I think it best that we record everything, especially all government employees -- including politicians, police, and military. As others have said, these recordings will reduce police corruption.

    And if we recorded politicians 24/7, we'd end the era of "big oil" deals, and RIAA/MPAA-mandated legislation, and all sorts of crap that goes on in back rooms that nobody ever hears about.

  • Cool but very dangerous. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by OwnerOfWhinyCat ( 654476 ) * on Thursday May 15, 2003 @03:48PM (#5967061)
    Bad assumptions abound here. Yes, this could make citizens safer from police. And since "Police Abuse of Power" is a popular meme it may seem like it's all daisies. First off the article doesn't go into nearly the depth needed to establish authentication. For instance: The recorder authenticates all the video to prevent changes, and it will have a checkout system to keep track of which officers have checked out which hard drives.

    This could mean the officer get's handed a clipboard and "signs out" a drive, like he does a gun or any other piece of equipment. For evidence that can be so damaging (to both victim and jerk (whichever they may be)) the standard must come up to a whole new level. Anything less than outstandingly modern security will allow the tired mystery novel scenario to occur:

    Officer A switches tivos with officer B; Officer A checks out drive 1 while signing for drive 2. Officer B checks out drive 2 while signing for drive 1. Officer A goes out to do something bad. Officer B drives a rush our traffic route so there are no tickets to hand out. That night they check in their drives, but Officer A has wiped his. Later Officer A is accused of a crime and has video to prove that he was somewhere else at the time. The fact that Officer B's drive crashed that day is not compelling evidence of anything.

    The device that checks out the hard drive should be a black box digital time clock that puts it's own signature in the data of the drive. The vending company should make the public keys available to verify the signature, but keep the private keys out of the reach of law enforcement altogether. The officer that checks out a drive should type his pass-phrase into the checkout terminal so that it can generate a second signature that cannot be replicated without the pass-phrase. The Tivo-like computer should, in addition to other features, keep a running log of which hard drives (by signature) have been inserted into it and when, and these logs (up to the last say 100 insertions) should be included and signed on each new hard drive that goes into the Tivo. So any hard disk mucking about would be distributed over all the hard disks in the pool, and they would therefore have to destroy them all to successfully cover this stuff up. With the addition of signed GPS location/timestamps swapping/editing could be pretty tough especially if the tivo device derived it's signature from an unremovable factory issued SIM.

    It's worth noting that I've never seen an episode of "Cops: A night of police screw ups."

    Censoring the things they don't want seen is already the norm, and it will continue to be unless we legislate it otherwise.

  • COPS 2004 (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mattsucks ( 541950 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @04:33PM (#5967449) Homepage
    Now, hook a wireless transmitter up to that videocam and let the reality-police shows abound! Think of the possibilities. Stream the video from selected cruisers live on the 'net. You get a UI to select the cruiser you wish to view, and voila! you are right there in the action.

  • Is this admissable as evidence? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by default luser ( 529332 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @04:55PM (#5967691) Journal
    That would be my biggest question, since the digital format is an order of magnitude easier to seamlessly edit than analog media.

  • I want one! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Ben Hutchings ( 4651 ) on Thursday May 15, 2003 @09:20PM (#5969482) Homepage
    The number of illegal and dangerous manouevres I see every week is significant, and I doubt that this is specific to where I live. I was pondering the idea of having a DVR like this and passing on recordings to the police (and volunteering as a witness to attest to the locations, times and accuracy of the recordings). It isn't going to happen any time soon, especially given that I'm going around on a bike not in a car, but maybe some time in the future it will be practical to fit DVRs to vehicles. The mere fact that they are commonplace would, I hope, act as a deterrent against the sort of crappy driving that people mostly get away with now. (Bad cyclists are another matter; without registration plates it's going to be hard to identify them. They're mostly a danger to themselves, though.)

Slashdot Top Deals

Math is like love -- a simple idea but it can get complicated. -- R. Drabek

Close