For years, a handful of civilian agencies have used limited images from the nation’s constellation of spy satellites to track hurricane damage, monitor climate change and create topographical maps. But a new plan to allow emergency response, border control and, eventually, law enforcement agencies greater access to sophisticated satellites and other sensors that monitor American territory has drawn sharp criticism from civil liberties advocates who say the government is overstepping the use of military technology for domestic surveillance.

There seems to be a conflict here even though nothing is going on yet. However, this discussion is inevitable. Why bother installing cameras on street corners when you already have them in space? Just think of it as a force multiplier. You don't have any right to privacy when you are outside! People COULD see you. Ergo it is OK if the government always sees you and keeps records of that indefinately. There is no difference!

Liberties Advocates Fear Abuse of Satellite Images - New York Times

Surveillance & Society

the fully peer-reviewed transdisciplinary online surveillance studies journal.

Surveillance & Society Homepage

You will be very hard pressed to find a more informed discussion of the issues surrounding the recent FISA bill and the less recent Habeas issues than this video. Its about an hour and a half. I enjoyed it.

Bloggingheads.tv: Kerr vs. Lendermann

Bondy, for the government, gets the last word and neatly sums up the case for the three judges.

"It's entirely possible that everything they think they know is entirely false," he says.

If you trust us, you're stupid.

Threat Level - Wired Blogs: The NSA surveillance hearing

Last night the House of Representatives approved a temporary amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that passed the Senate on Friday night. President Bush will sign it shortly. The language is here. On the merits, I think this legislation on the whole seems relatively well done.

I really don't agree with this perspective, but there are links from here to lots of others. The idea that the executive has hereby been authorized to monitor ALL international calls to and from the US is a dramatic policy shift. However, there is something unsettling about both the timing of this and its duration. I think pundits may be underestimating the seriousness of statements made by numerous individuals that a terrorist attack is more likely in the coming months. This may, in fact, be a temporary patch done to deal with a specific threat which may be reconsidered later. For the time being, however, anything you say on an international call can and will be used against you in a court of law.

The Volokh Conspiracy - My Take on the New FISA Amendment:

The U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is funding Wood's research in the hope that it will lead to stealth surveillance robots for the battlefield and urban environments. The robot's small size and fly-like appearance are critical to such missions.

Technology Review: Robotic Insect Takes Off for the First Time

By the end of this year, police officials say, more than 100 cameras will have begun monitoring cars moving through Lower Manhattan, the beginning phase of a London-style surveillance system that would be the first in the United States.

Now THATS what I call passing the costs on to the consumer!

Manhattan takes cue from London's 'Ring of Steel' - International Herald Tribune

Recently, we took another important step to improve our privacy practices by announcing a new policy to anonymize our server logs after 18 to 24 months, becoming the first leading search company to publish a data retention policy. We also posted here to explain the factors that guided our decision to retain server log data for 18 to 24 months.

1. Thank you!
2. I'll need to read further and figure out what "anonymize" means.

Official Google Blog: How long should Google remember searches?

Best google maps image yet. Sparkn' a pipe...

Mission St & 16th St, San Francisco, CA - Google Maps

It is the policy of The Washington Post not to publish anonymous pieces. In this case, an exception has been made because the author -- who would have preferred to be named -- is legally prohibited from disclosing his or her identity in connection with receipt of a national security letter.
---

Without the gag orders issued on recipients of the letters, it is doubtful that the FBI would have been able to abuse the NSL power the way that it did. Some recipients would have spoken out about perceived abuses, and the FBI's actions would have been subject to some degree of public scrutiny.

I found it particularly difficult to be silent about my concerns while Congress was debating the reauthorization of the Patriot Act in 2005 and early 2006. If I hadn't been under a gag order, I would have contacted members of Congress to discuss my experiences and to advocate changes in the law.

I recognize that there may sometimes be a need for secrecy in certain national security investigations. But I've now been under a broad gag order for three years, and other NSL recipients have been silenced for even longer. At some point -- a point we passed long ago -- the secrecy itself becomes a threat to our democracy. In the wake of the recent revelations, I believe more strongly than ever that the secrecy surrounding the government's use of the national security letters power is unwarranted and dangerous. I hope that Congress will at last recognize the same thing.

My National Security Letter Gag Order - washingtonpost.com