Seattle Police Department Hosts Contest Looking for Hackers Who Can Doctor Officers' Dash Cam Videos

[Ryan Fitzomething]

Source: Alternet

December 24, 2014 | One of the reforms being promoted to reduce police brutality is greater use of mandatory cameras by police units to ensure that excessive force isn't used. Dashboard and body cameras can also, purportedly, protect police officers from false accusations.

The Seattle Police Department has a dashboard camera system in place, but says it can't allow the public to view the footage out of privacy concerns. In order to share the recordings with the public, it has to blur faces and distort voices.

As a result, the SPD is hosting a contest looking for “a few good hackers” to step up and redact its videos so it can release the 314,636 hours of videos it's captured over the past five years.

Read more: http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/seattle-police-department-hosts-contest-looking-hackers-who-can-doctor-officers

---

No evil intent, I'm sure. Nothing to see here, people. Now run along and watch the Kardashians!

[arcane1]

1. They apparently have no idea what the word "hacker" means.

Dumb-asses.

[PatrynXX]

5. all I know is Hackers are the good guys and Crackers are the bad guys

I assume they are looking for hackers but maybe they really want crackers

[JonLP24]

10. Hacker is someone who expands or tests the limits of whatever device's capabilies

of whatever it is they're exploring. The Xbox Kinect is an example of something people discovered capabilities that beyond its intended purpose.

A cracker is someone who is a trying to crack internet security systems or whatever it is they're trying to infiltrate.

The good and bad is differentiated from "white hat&quot those that do it to figure out weaknesses and to test strengths of security systems) and "black hat".

This is basically how computer programmers often view the terms.

[lumberjack_jeff]

2. Call google street view and ask them how they did it.

http://www.google.com/maps/about/behind-the-scenes/streetview/privacy/

[cstanleytech]

3. Actually privacy concerns over the videos are a legit issue Ryan when it comes to releasing copies

to the public as I am sure there are some people who while they might have been questioned by the police would probably just as well not want some people to know like their spouse or their boss especially if it might jeopardize their marriage or job.

[47of74]

4. I agree with you.

There are very good reasons why not to release video as is - such as maintaining the rights and the privacy of the people they deal with.

However it needs to be so that the police can't just have the videos edited because they want to hide that time one of their own decided he or she didn't like the way a minority teenager looked at them and decided to beat the shit out of them or pump their bodies full of lead.

I think the people who edit video in such circumstances should have a high degree of organizational independence; that they don't answer to anyone in the police department and answer to someone outside public safety (such as a finance head).

[cstanleytech]

12. Except this doesnt sound like they mean the original video is whats going to be edited but

rather the copies released to the public which makes sense.
Think of it like the original star wars trilogy before Lucas added the new effects.

[TeamPooka]

6. They are talking about video editing, not hacking. Stupid. nt

[msongs]

7. doctoring and witholding evidence. didn't that used to be a crime? nt

[951-Riverside]

8. "so it can release the 314,636 hours of videos it's captured over the past five years"

Hmm. What happened to destroying documents after a certain amount of years?

As this becomes the norm people are not going to talk to police officers even casually.

Oh well.

[7962]

9. Maybe thats why its 5 yrs. Anything older is gone?

Arent we supposed to save tax records for 7?

[ohnoyoudidnt]

11. So prioritize the videos.

Most are probably routine and boring. The ones that result in allegations of brutality should be at the top of the list.

[cstanleytech]

13. They are better off to go purely in chronological order because otherwise

people will accuse them of cherrypicking what to release.

[freshwest]

15. True. But I don't even know if just changing the face and voices is enough privacy for citizens.

[jtuck004]

14. Get 'em released. We want to see what is inside those homes and private businesses all

across America, now that a court ruled you have no privacy from police cameras.

Gonna be some interesting results from those...

[bemildred]

16. Gee, an information dump, that's what the CIA tried on the Senate.

We'd love to be forthcoming, but we just can't, see? It's just not practical.

[Taitertots]

17. By "privacy concerns" they mean "we want to obstruct the process until it is impossible"

Because to my knowledge (I'm not a lawyer), there are no laws/case law that require them to do it.

Look at the language. "Privacy concerns". If they were required by statue, they would say "legally required".

[L0oniX]

18. Tampering with evidence!

[Kennah]

19. Either an attempt at Man Bites Dog, or Seattle is trying to outweird Portland