Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Helloscottykitty t1_j6seaw5 wrote

Chain of security will and is a thing, you ever wonder why your dash cam footage gets just a nod from the police and a we will look into it, well because its not a cctv system being recorded onto tape inside a locked box.

You still have to provide reasonable assurance that video is from a trusted source, you will have meta data specialists working on less secure forms of stored media.

40

BinyaminDelta t1_j6smyuq wrote

Modern security systems don't "record onto tape," either.

13

Helloscottykitty t1_j6snk49 wrote

Let's be real how many places are using ssd, my works modern system still uses dvds.

The important part is that not just anyone can go and access it or interfere, 1 guy with the key and that's it

7

Jakcle20 t1_j6tzhth wrote

Sorry but the big glaring weakness to me is that there's a human with access to it and that it's locked behind a lock. Both of those things are fallible. No matter how good of a lock you think you have, it can be exploited. No matter how trustworthy a person seems, they can be bought/coerced/eliminated.

8

Helloscottykitty t1_j6u1kvg wrote

True but that's why it's proof beyond a reasonable level of doubt.

I could take strands of your hair and plant them at a crime scene while wearing a high tech containment suit to not leave any of mine.

I could hire actors who are your body double and commit the crime in front of a bunch of witnesses.

Everything is fallible but as video evidence stands a key from a trusted person, who often stands to gain little from giving others access is the most reasonable level of evidence you can provide.

Cctv systems are also a little different in the way they record onto whatever medium they chose that itself has validation methods I am aware of but never had explained.

11

johnp299 t1_j6snrfb wrote

This. Some kind of secure hardware and image/data watermarking is needed. Have a certification process. Uncertified footage won't be trusted.

7

throwaway4abetterday t1_j6sp5en wrote

That's not the reason why cops ignore it. Cops ignore it because they're in on the abuse and don't want to rat out their friends.

7

Helloscottykitty t1_j6spmnf wrote

Than swap out dash cams with ring door bells, I'm not going to comment on the police from USA but UK police like to have reasonable evidence that they can use in court.

2

throwaway4abetterday t1_j6sq7xb wrote

No, swap out your flippant attitude with a more interested and caring one.

You can't be reductive with the corrupt police issue, and the UK's are no different than the U.S.'s or anywhere else's. I bet you'll dispute that point though, and not address the fact that police dismissal of video evidence has nothing to do with technology.

−4

orincoro t1_j6tvzyi wrote

lol. The UK’s issues are EXTREMELY DIFFFERENT from those of the US.

2

BMXTKD t1_j6v1utv wrote

Not to mention, how decentralized the US is. It's even in the country's name. United States. Which means the police force over in bugtussle, missouri, is going to be a lot different than the police force over in Seattle Washington. Even the police force over in bellevue, Washington is going to be different than the police force over in seattle, washington. Even though they are in the same metropolitan area.

0

Iwasahipsterbefore t1_j6xrgzj wrote

No, they're not. That's the thing. They're not different due to a nationwide effort for the past century or so to homogenize and militarize the U.S police force. Everyone gets put through the same "warrior" training that involves traumatizing new officers by making them watch videos of cops get violently murdered. Nationwide, we cull recruits that score too highly on intake tests. Nationwide, cops are from outside the county or town they work in to help them Other people.

The bare details like "which cop gang do these cops belong to?" Might change, but that's about it.

0

BMXTKD t1_j6xzql1 wrote

"nationwide, we call recruits that score to highly on intake tests.".

"Nationwide, cops outside the county or town they work in help them"

I can think of many communities where you have to have a four year criminal justice degree, and residency requirements to serve in their communities. The states where they don't have either of those things, is where you find more corrupt police. My state has a four year degree requirement, but not a residency requirement. Before they repealed The residency requirement, cops were actually quite decent.

1

Helloscottykitty t1_j6ssscf wrote

As I said I won't comment on police in the USA and I won't argue with you, you came to a thread with the discussion being about how deep fakes may impact the judicial system and you don't feel that before deep fakes become troubling that they cared about video evidence in the first place.

What point could I possibly provide that would make you feel differently, your either looking for a non rational argument or you are non rational yourself.

0

throwaway4abetterday t1_j6st3sh wrote

What is it you think you're doing now?

Address the counter-claim. Address the statement, "Police don't ignore dashcam footage because its origin cannot easily be proven, it's ignored because police are corrupt and are trying to protect their friends".

Address it. If you have the courage.

−3

-The_Blazer- t1_j6txk2s wrote

Yup. I think in the future this will be expanded: there will be cryptographically verified sensors that sign their images (or other products) with a unique key that represents a "trusted" sensor. Fabricating keys or modifying sensors will carry extremely harsh penalties.

5

Helloscottykitty t1_j6u09t9 wrote

Yeah this is my thoughts to, I think 3 key innovation/techs will play a key role, first being further developments in wireless Internet to the point it is everywhere, we wil all want this for everything.

Second will be quantum computing , which will provide encryption and verification.

The last will be a digital passport, this will provide authentication which by the time it exists the idea of being anonymous or not being able to be verified will seem alien to us than.

2

-The_Blazer- t1_j6u0vx2 wrote

Yep. We already have digital ID in my country, although using it if you're a third party is still hard enough that EG Twitter won't allow you to use it to verify yourself. Which is a pity, because I'd much rather trust Twitter with a "verified" message from the government than a scan of my ID card.

3

Mayor__Defacto t1_j6uabxr wrote

Yep. And to expand on this, the justice system largely operates on trust, but you can’t just decide to randomly introduce your own video into evidence. If the prosecution though the video/audio could be faked (based on their own evidence that has a proven chain of custody), there would be an evidentiary hearing to figure out whether the jury should even be allowed to see it.

4