Police forces across the country now have access to surveillance technologies that were recently available only to national intelligence services. The digitization of bias and abuse of power followed.
Smart city solutions have proved handy for curbing the contagion, but recent experience has also shown how much they rely on public trust. And that in turn depends on transparency and robust safeguards
Contact tracing is being touted as essential to controlling the spread of COVID-19, but it comes with alarming concerns related to our rights to privacy.
As governments consider the use of surveillance technologies to trace and contain the spread of COVID-19, it is important to consider human rights in the implementation.
The Australian National University is turning to digital proctoring to replace the role of a walking invigilator. But who watches the proctor, what are the risks, and what data will be collected?
Current restrictions remind us of the value of access to public space and one another. Yet even before COVID-19 some people were excluded and targeted, so a return to the status quo isn’t good enough.
Cellphone data can show who coronavirus patients interacted with, which can help isolate infected people before they feel ill. But how digital contact tracing is implemented matters.
Instead of seeking to protect our health and stop the coronavirus epidemic by instituting totalitarian surveillance regimes, we should rather focus on empowering citizens.
Our mobile phone’s location data could be a valuable tool to help track and trace the spread of the coronavirus outbreak. The government has the legal power to do it, given what’s at stake.
Recently, police forces have come under criticism for their engagement of facial recognition technologies. But pandemic response plans may increasingly incorporate surveillance.
Research reveals a complicated relationship between surveillance and freedom, as surveillance activities allow for greater autonomy for women hoping to work in Jordan.