←back to thread

NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester

(www.thecity.nyc)
291 points dataflow | 5 comments | 18 Jul 25 13:15 UTC | HN request time: 1.256s | source
Show context
gruez ◴[18 Jul 25 14:11 UTC] No.44604843[source]▶
>A city fire marshal used FDNY’s access to a facial recognition software to help NYPD detectives identify a pro-Palestinian protester at Columbia University, circumventing policies that tightly restrict the Police Department’s use of the technology.

Why does the fire department need access to run facial recognition?

replies(4): >>44604976 #>>44605387 #>>44605709 #>>44605831 #
1. dmix ◴[18 Jul 25 14:25 UTC] No.44604976[source]▶
The cop emailed the Fire Marshal who technically does investigations for stuff like arson. Maybe that's the justification for it, not sure.
replies(1): >>44605022 #
2. toomuchtodo ◴[18 Jul 25 14:29 UTC] No.44605022[source]▶
Same operating model of law enforcement laundering their data requests on the Flock Safety/Group ALPR platform through adjacent agencies who have access. My hot take is this should be a termination and criminal offense in public employment (as a cybersecurity/risk mgmt practitioner).
replies(2): >>44605128 #>>44608033 #
3. dmix ◴[18 Jul 25 14:38 UTC] No.44605128[source]▶
Or Five Eyes doing data sharing between themselves which 'incidentally' bypasses domestic surveillance laws

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/20/us-uk-secret-d...

4. geodel ◴[18 Jul 25 18:13 UTC] No.44608033[source]▶
This sounds great. Have your clients or employers followed this advice?
replies(1): >>44608137 #
5. toomuchtodo ◴[18 Jul 25 18:23 UTC] No.44608137{3}[source]▶
Yes, and in some cases, I was the person who had to sign off on the termination after providing a packet from the incident response case (which feels about as terrible as having to lay someone off, having had to do that before too).