garrence   10 #553 Posted February 13, 2010 An audit trail would only provide evidence if a breach was suspected. Someone would need to put 2+2 together first. How do you know there won't be an audit trail?  Indeed. And in this scenario a suspicion of a breach would be very unlikely - chances are we'll make a fortune in ill gotten gains.  You've told logins are recorded so, by inference, individual lookups are not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
pehorts1   10 #554 Posted February 13, 2010 Once theyve got the cameras set up all around town theyll introduce some sort of tax for driving on busy routes like the congestion charge  That thought has passed my mind, after all the town planners do not need to record number plate information to gather data on planning issues. The law enforcement agencies will benefit if they are able to use the information to track criminals or suspected terrorists, which will in the long run make the city a safer place to live. But the same information can be used to make more money for the council and government by setting up a congestion charge on these routes and using the data gathered by these cameras to find the name and addresses of the registered car owners so they can send a bill to their address. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Take Two   10 #555 Posted February 13, 2010 sry to interrupt, but how do you start a thread on here? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
garrence   10 #556 Posted February 13, 2010 sry to interrupt, but how do you start a thread on here?  When logged in, click "Start topic" above the list of posts on whatever board you want to post on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Take Two   10 #557 Posted February 13, 2010 ------Thx. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Planner1 Â Â 437 #558 Posted February 14, 2010 That thought has passed my mind, after all the town planners do not need to record number plate information to gather data on planning issues. The law enforcement agencies will benefit if they are able to use the information to track criminals or suspected terrorists, which will in the long run make the city a safer place to live. But the same information can be used to make more money for the council and government by setting up a congestion charge on these routes and using the data gathered by these cameras to find the name and addresses of the registered car owners so they can send a bill to their address. Â The political leaders in South Yorkshire have clearly said that congestion charging is NOT on their agenda. Â The camera setup which would be needed to introduce congestion charging is very different to the one SYITS are using. The SYITS system is set up for providing real time journey time information on key routes across South Yorkshire, NO consideration has been given to any future use in congestion charging. Â If you recall, the system the government were proposing involved GPS tagging of all vehicles, it didn't use ANPR. The London system uses ANPR, but that is only part of the equipment they use. London's congestion charge is set up on a cordon around the central zone. The SYITS system is to monitor point to point journey times on corridors, so camera positions and numbers are very different. Â Basically, SYITS is NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with congestion charging. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
sccsux   10 #559 Posted February 14, 2010 The political leaders in South Yorkshire have clearly said that congestion charging is NOT on their agenda.  Maybe not yet. But in the future (CG depending) possibly.  The SYITS system is set up for providing real time journey time information on key routes across South Yorkshire  No need for data retention then:thumbsup:.  SYITS is NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with congestion charging.  But has lots to do with spying on our individual movements. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
splodgeyAl   10 #560 Posted February 15, 2010 An audit trail would only provide evidence if a breach was suspected. Someone would need to put 2+2 together first. How do you know there won't be an audit trail?  So, you (as in the extended council) are building a data warehouse of journey details, that you intend to mine for various metrics about the population at large and the journeys made by them, but don't have the ability to check an individual file / table for a number of suspicious usage patterns that could then be flagged for investigation. Sounds unlikely to me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Tony   10 #561 Posted July 5, 2010 If it's good enough for the police...  http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jul/04/anpr-surveillance-numberplate-recognition  The home secretary, Theresa May, has ordered that a national police camera network that logs more than 10m movements of motorists every day be placed under statutory regulation. Her decision means that a "Big Brother" police database that currently holds a mammoth 7.6bn records of the movement of motorists using more than 4,000 cameras across the country will have to be operated with proper accountability and safeguards.  Each entry on the database includes the numberplate, location, date, time and a photograph of the front of the car, which may include images of the driver and any passengers. These details are routinely held for two years.  The options being looked at by the Home Office for regulating the system, known as automatic number plate recognition (ANPR), include establishing a lawful right for the police to collect and retain such details as well as defining who can gain access to the database and placing a legal limit on the period information can be stored for. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Ravenmoon   10 #562 Posted February 4, 2011 Sheffield Council to decide the fate of your data After warnings from the Information Commissioner Lib Dem controlled Sheffield Council is currently in the process of deciding what to do with the personal information they collect on residents' movements. The council owns 100 ANPR cameras that are logging details of residents' journeys. Currently the police are given access to this information that is being retained on a database by the Council. There is a proposal on the table that would see this data deleted after its initial intended use by the Council. We would urge all our Sheffield supporters to write to their Councillors asking them at the very least to adopt this proposal, but ideally, as our elected representatives, to stop collecting and sharing this personal information. You can use the WriteToThem website to contact your local councillor (http://www.writetothem.com)  Please join the Sheffield mailing list If you haven't already: http://lists.no2id.net/mailman/listinfo/no2id.sheffield Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Tony   10 #563 Posted February 4, 2011 Reference thread with a quite heated debate on the subject.  http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?p=6431233&highlight=anpr#post6431233 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Greybeard   10 #564 Posted February 4, 2011 Wonder if they would let me have a look at it. I'd be interested to learn where our lass gets to when she's 'out and about'. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...