Slashdot Mirror


Spysats Keeping Watch on the U.S.

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."

15 of 304 comments (clear)

  1. nothing new by BWJones · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "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?

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:nothing new by inKubus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      GIS is amazing stuff. There are a number of great trade publications that can be had for free.

      Here 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.

      --
      Cool! Amazing Toys.
    2. Re:nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      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.

  2. Nothing to see by WPIDalamar · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.

  3. That's fine. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  4. The answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
  5. For all you conspiracy theorists... by Aceto3for5 · · Score: 5, Funny

    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...

  6. Don't see much threat to privacy here... by RCulpepper · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    --
    Always a godfather; never a god. -Gore Vidal
  7. Re:Not worried about this.... by Frennzy · · Score: 5, Interesting
    not doing anything I shouldn't be doing, nor going anywhere I shouldn't be going


    According to YOU you're not. What happens when the government decides differently? What if going to an AA meeting is suddenly grounds for a background check, and then that information is suddenly available to your employer, who doesn't want any 'freakin' alcoholics' on the payroll?

    Or what about attending that civil-rights protest? Or the million man march? Or your wife/girlfriend/daughter going to an abortion clinic? See what I mean? Just assuming you aren't doing anything wrong doesn't mean that the gov can't decide otherwise.
  8. Here's why I care by DanielMarkham · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  9. Might be a nice time to mention... by daveschroeder · · Score: 5, Informative
    ...some of the ways we benefit from the work of the NGA:

    National Map (National Map Viewer)

    (and the somewhat related National Atlas)

  10. Re:duh by randyflood · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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...

    --
    Randy.Flood@RHCE2B.COM
  11. Re:Not worried about this.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Its a sad commentary on the ignorance of Americans that you have to explain why Stalinist surveillence is dangerous...

  12. Re:Put it to good use by IceWing_mk1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  13. I'd rather that they... by MacFury · · Score: 5, Insightful
    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.