Surveillance Technology - Term Paper Example

The aim of this paper is to support the usage of surveillance technology in ensuring the safety of the public at large. The types of surveillance technologies available today are described, along with their applications. The major categories discussed will be cameras or video surveillance, biometrics, Internet and communications surveillance, eavesdropping, radio frequency identification (RFID) and advanced imaging technology (AIT). Criticisms and limitations of surveillance technology are also discussed, as are the justifications for its continued usage by law enforcement agencies. Keywords: surveillance, surveillance technology, cameras, video surveillance, eavesdropping, RFID, privacy concerns, justification for surveillance technology INTRODUCTION ⁠Before delving into the issue of surveillance technology, it is first necessary to properly define the term “surveillance.” My understanding of the word is the monitoring of an individual or group of people for the purpose of preventing or correcting a crime. It is an important element of law enforcement to be able to keep abreast of real-time developments and movements in the public sphere. Prior to the usage of cameras and video surveillance, manual observers would need to be placed in the relevant areas. While it is important to maintain a human presence to deter crime, it is also unfeasible to be able to see everything all the time in that area. Hence it is a complementary and necessary policy to use surveillance technology. It is also important to be able to monitor more discreet elements such as odors, trace explosive materials or radiation in public areas. Surveillance technology plays a major role in this regard. TYPES OF SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY IN USE TODAY Perhaps the advancement of surveillance technology from the twentieth century onwards is best shown though the rapid development of video surveillance. Cameras are used to survey traffic and to prevent and detect crime. In Britain, over 4 million closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras are in use while the United States Border Patrol spent US$64 million on remote video systems (Aresty, 2006)⁠. Wilkerson explains that true video surveillance began in the 1960s with the introduction and application of closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras (Wilkerson, 2008)⁠ by law enforcement agencies. From there, analog technology continued to develop influence surveillance techniques. Video cassette recorders allowed preservation of evidence and from the 1970s onwards businesses prone to theft mounted CCTV cameras on their premises both as a deterrent and as a tool to apprehend thieves. In family court cases, video evidence of adultery and poor parenting decided the outcomes of cases. Analog technology reached its nadir in through the 1980s to the late 1990s with charged couple device cameras enabling recording in low light and night conditions. Digital multiplexing allowed for recording on several cameras at once with time-lapse and motion detection capability. In the mid-1990s, automated telling machines (ATMs) had video cameras installed as a standard procedure worldwide. Digital technology further improved surveillance capabilities of law enforcement agencies. This technology provided clearer and more reliable images and required much less physical storage than analog tapes. From 1997 onwards, police used digital cameras across the United States. “Nanny cams” also became prominent as a niche market was realized. Market forces drove towards smaller and higher resolution cameras that were easily hidden. This adoption of digital video surveillance technology was also alluded to by Douglas (Douglas, 2010)⁠, who elaborated on the importance of high resolution, high megapixel (MP) cameras. Images do not blur when focusing or zooming in on a specific instance or element of the video image. Modern digital cameras installed in business premises for example can zoom 300 feet and make out individual license plates. Douglas also noted that the cost of these cameras goes down as the technology improves. Axis, a security camera company, sells high definition camera with 2 MP resolution with built-in optical zoom and intelligent analytical software for US$1500 (Douglas, 2010)⁠. After the events of September 11, 2001, software developers began refining programs such as facial recognition software (Wilkerson, 2008; Yang, Capell, & Port, 2005)⁠. In 2002, facial recognition cameras were installed at the Statue of Liberty and at Ellis Island. In December of 2003, a pilot program for tracking missing children and registered sex offenders was introduced in Arizona which used this technology. The proliferation of streaming technology on the Internet further enabled surveillance technology virtually worldwide. Currently, camera phones allow anyone to record anything surreptitiously. Wilkerson (Wilkerson, 2008)⁠ proposed that law enforcement agencies can use emerging technologies as integrated devices, combining video surveillance with public phone systems. Cell phones with steaming video capability also enable the public and the police to immediately send images and videos to the authorities, enabling quick and efficient responses to possible threats. Aresty and Yang et al. describe other forms of surveillance technologies (Aresty, 2006; Yang et al., 2005)⁠. Biometrics is the recognition of the human bodys characterizing features: the face, iris, fingerprints, odors and saliva. Although a fully successful identification record is still not fully realized, biometrics is just as capable of vindicating an innocent person by establishing the correct identification. In Britain, identity cards are to be made compulsory from 2013 onwards. Embedded in the cards will be a chip containing such information as digital photographs, fingerprint scans and iris scans of the respective citizen. Gait recognition is another technology in development. Eavesdropping is another evergreen method of surveillance (Aresty, 2006; Yang et al., 2005)⁠. In 2003, the United States Congress approved 1,442 wiretaps. The National Security Administration (NSA) initiated Project Echelon, which is a global electronic eavesdropping system that can intercept telecommunication signals through satellites, microwave towers and cable transmissions. Software-defined radio also enables ease of interception of cellular communications. In 2000, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) introduced its Carnivore program to the public (“Surveillance Technology: The FBIs Carnivore Program,” n d). Carnivore was developed by the FBIs Engineering Research Facility in 1999 to covertly search for e-mails and computer messages from criminal suspects. The application of the Carnivore program was to conduct electronic surveillance of e-mail and Internet communications at Internet service provider (ISP) facilities pursuant to court orders. A major technology introduced in 2005 is Radio Frequency Identification tags (RFID) (Aresty, 2006; Yang et al., 2005)⁠. RFID tags are tiny computer chips that receive electromagnetic signals in the form of radio waves. They are the size of a thumbnail, paper-thin, and can be affixed to any surface. They can retain any information about any subject such as biometric information and each RFID tag has its own unique ID number and connected antenna. They can travel through clothing, walls and windows without obstruction, misorientation or detection. RFID tags allow for many benefits (Aresty, 2006)⁠. They allow for banks to profile and identify customers. They enable electronic frisking of citizens at invisible checkpoints, and tracking of citizens in airports and border-crossing points. They also enable the tracking of mail via embedded postal stamps as well as the tracking of library and store materials. One of the biggest issues in modern surveillance technology is that of monitoring travellers in airports and other transportation hubs. The American Transportation Security Administration (TSA) employs several screening technologies either in development or in current application: paperless boarding passes, biometrics, bottled liquid scanners, Castsope⁠ (screens of casts and prothetics), explosives detection systems, explosive trace detection, Threat Image Projection, and Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) (“Innovation and Technology - Our Approach,” n d)⁠. The TSA was the subject of a lot of controversy over its usage of AIT in airports throughout the United States. They began deploying the technology in 2007 with 486 millimeter wave and backscatter machines at 78 airports. From March 2010 the TSA deployed 450 units of AIT machines. Currently the TSA is testing new software that enhances the privacy of passengers by eliminating passenger-specific images and instead focusing only on potential threat items by locating them on a generic outline. If no potential threat items are detected, only an image displaying “OK” would appear on monitoring screens. This system was tested in February of 2011 (“Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT),” 2011)⁠. In a poll conducted by CBS News, 81% of respondents actually supported AIT technology over other, more intrusive screening or surveillance methods (Condon, 2010)⁠. ISSUES RELATED TO SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY Douglas (Douglas, 2010) argues that a challenge for wireless network operated camera systems is the high bandwidth required to transmit high-resolution digital video or thermal images. The problem intensifies when more and more cameras are added to a wireless network. This poses a major problem for a city-wide application of wireless camera technology. Yang et al. further this argument by stating that the overhead costs in maintenance and dossier-building would also be quite prohibitive in terms of other advanced sensors as well (Yang et al., 2005)⁠. The BBC conducted an interview with computer security expert Phil Zimmermann, who expressed his fears of abuse of surveillance technology (Vallance, 2009)⁠⁠. Zimmermanns central argument was that current technology and its ongoing trends point to an increasing ability for police and law enforcement authorities to know “everything about everyone all the time.” He explains that the coupling of CCTV systems with face-recognition algorithms lead towards something that is able to undermine democratic insitutions. The biggest fear is that it is not just the criminals who are affected by data mining; everyone has sensitive information that they would like to keep private such as medical information and other private matters (Vallance, 2009; Yang et al., 2005)⁠. Zimmermann further argues that while counter-surveillance is possible through encryption of e-mail, the physical world of a person is not subject to the same encryption. However, because criminals are also able to use modern technology, governments and police are justified in their usage of surveillance technology so long as they do not do so excessively. Other criticisms of surveillance technology are presented by Aresty and Yang et al. (Aresty, 2006; Yang et al., 2005)⁠. Firstly is that those in a position of authority will always have the more advanced technology and hence have the upper hand in surveillance. It is also easier now to expose people indiscriminately and discreetly via camera phones (Wilkerson, 2008; Yang et al., 2005)⁠. Advances in Internet technologies also allows for cyberspace intrusions (Aresty, 2006)⁠. Methods such as Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) hijacking, pharming, phishing, and spyware are used by many criminals with an Internet connection. However, it is clear that the advantages of surveillance technology in the efforts to prevent crimes and to protect citizens far outweigh the criticisms. The usage of camera phones and integration with social networks such as Twitter and Facebook allows for quick responses by the relevant authorities, which would not have been possible otherwise. Yang et al. argued that for all of Londons cameras, the bombings of July 2005 were not prevented (Yang et al., 2005)⁠. However, the technology still enabled the identification of the suspects responsible for the atrocities. The same is true of the Mumbai terror attacks of 2008. In a democratic sphere, checks and balances will always exist to ensure that the surveillance of citizens does not overstep constitutionally recognized rights. In California, the Reader Privacy Act SB602 was introduced to protect the First Amendment right of United States citizens to access information anonymously and without fear of governmental recrimination. The Center For Democracy & Technology supported this Act based on growing trends of access of books online through Internet libraries and services such as Google Books (Nojiem, 2011)⁠. The Act ensures that the government and other third parties cannot access provate reading records of individuals without proper justification through warrants or court order. CONCLUSION From the above discussion it is clear that surveillance technology has come a long way from manual surveillance of individuals or crowds to the automated and reliable usage of digital cameras and biometric sensors. As technology continues to advance, it is the responsibility of both the citizens and the law enforcement agencies to use this technology to protect and serve the society at large. Surveillance is a necessary tool that enables us to monitor activities in public areas and to protect businesses and prevent crimes. Even in cases where crimes do occur, modern technology allows for the quick identification and apprehension of the guilty parties. Civil liberties and rights enshrined in the Constitution also ensure that abuse of surveillance technology is curtailed. For all of the above reasons, I am in support of the usage and continual improvement of modern surveillance systems. REFERENCES Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT). (2011). Transportation Security Administration. Retrieved April 22, 2011, from http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/ait/index.shtm. Aresty, J. (2006). Types of Surveillance Technology Currently Used by Governments and Corporations - Powered by Google Docs. Internetbar.org. Retrieved April 21, 2011, from https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://apps.americanbar.org/intlaw/calendar/spring2006/papers/FRI9451100ARESTY_496.ppt. Condon, S. (2010). Poll: 4 in 5 Support Full-Body Airport Scanners. Political Hotsheet. Retrieved April 22, 2011, from http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20022876-503544.html. Douglas, M. (2010). The Impending Explosion. Urgent Communications. Retrieved April 21, 2011, from http://urgentcomm.com/networks_and_systems/mag/high-res-video-surveillance-201001/. Innovation and Technology - Our Approach. (n.d.). Transportation Security Administration. Retrieved April 21, 2011, from http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/index.shtm. Nojiem, G. (2011). CDT Letter in Support of SB 602, The Reader Privacy Act. Center For Democracy & Technology. Retrieved April 22, 2011, from http://www.cdt.org/letter/cdt-letter-support-sb-602-reader-privacy-act. Surveillance Technology: The FBIʼs Carnivore Program. (n.d.). Telecommunications Industry Association. Retrieved April 21, 2011, from http://www.tiaonline.org/standards/technology/calea/surveillance_technology.cfm. Vallance, C. (2009). Surveillance fears for the UK. BBC News. Retrieved April 21, 2011, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8029349.stm. Wilkerson, L. (2008). The History of Video Surveillance – From VCRs to Eyes in the Sky. TheHistoryOf.net. Retrieved April 21, 2011, from http://www.thehistoryof.net/history-of-video-surveillance.html. Yang, C., Capell, K., & Port, O. (2005). The State Of Surveillance. Businessweek. Retrieved April 21, 2011, from http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_32/b3946001_mz001.htm. Read More