Crave privacy? New tech knocks out digital cameras

[The Grim Squeaker]

hers at the Georgia Institute of Technology have come up with an inexpensive way to prevent digital cameras and digital video cameras from capturing that secret shot.

The technology they've devised detects the presence of a digital camera up to 33 feet away and can then shoot a targeted beam of light at the lens, according to Shwetak Patel, a grad student at the university and one of the lead researchers on the project.
click to view photos of prototype

That means that someone trying for a surreptitious snapshot of, say, a product prototype or an amorous couple gets something altogether less useful--a blurry picture (or a video) of what looks like a flashlight beam, seen head on. (A video of how the system works can be viewed here.)

The group has developed a lab prototype--which consists of a digital projector with a modified video camera mounted on top--but will soon design a device that could be manufactured and sold commercially. The group, which presented a paper on its work at Ubicomp (The Seventh International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing) in Tokyo last week, is also in contact with large consumer electronics manufacturers.

Though photo-foiling gadgets are one possibility, the technology might also eventually be incorporated into digital projectors and other devices as a feature.

The Georgia Tech researchers aren't alone in their pursuit. Tech giant Hewlett-Packard, for one, has applied for a patent on technology that could remotely cause blurry pictures in digital cameras, but it requires putting additional circuitry inside the camera. HP and others are also working on projection technology meant to stymie video piracy.

The technology is a stab at ameliorating the privacy problems that have arisen with the advent, quick ubiquity and tiny dimensions of digital cameras. Nearly 85 percent of cell phones in Japan come with built-in digital cameras, and the figure for North America and Western Europe is supposed to rise to 80 percent by the end of next year, according to market researcher Gartner.

"It certainly is a concern, and it has been a concern since cameras have gotten really small," said Steve Baker, an analyst at NPD Group. "It is a lab trick that has some real-world application."

Companies commonly confiscate digital cameras temporarily from visitors coming to their labs or confidential meetings. "But you can't confiscate a phone. Someone might be expecting an important call," Patel said.

Many companies also maintain strict no-photography policies in quasi public places. Someone trying to take pictures inside a Wal-Mart or an electronics boutique will immediately draw a warning, or expulsion. Conferences also have similar rules. Patel himself got in trouble trying to take a picture of a "No Photography" sign to illustrate where the

Continued ...

This might even be used in cinemas, sounds interesting if it's easy to set up and maintain.
link

[Mr Bean]

This might even be used in cinemas, sounds interesting if it's easy to set up and maintain.
link

Except for the whole bright beam of light part. Not to mention the video camera will have to be either an expensive low-light verison or its not going to see anything but a dark theater.

[Hotfoot]

This might even be used in cinemas, sounds interesting if it's easy to set up and maintain.
link

Except for the whole bright beam of light part. Not to mention the video camera will have to be either an expensive low-light verison or its not going to see anything but a dark theater.

Actually, the light doesn't have to be visible, it can be Infrared. CCDs pick up Infrared very clearly (part of why they work so well in low-light situation). Flooding the cinima with infrared light would render CCDs virtually worthless while having no impact on actually watching the movie.

[Graeme Dice]

I think a better title would be "New Technology uses Lasers to Blind Camera Operators", since that's exactly what is likely to happen.

[Beowulf]

So how exactly are they detecting a fairly passive instrument?

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

Solution: Use a film camera instead.

[nickolay1]

Solution two (for the single beam version mentioned in the original arrticle, not the IR flooding method proposed): Use decoys.

[SPOOFE]

CCDs pick up Infrared very clearly (part of why they work so well in low-light situation). Flooding the cinima with infrared light would render CCDs virtually worthless while having no impact on actually watching the movie.

What about CMOS sensors? Are they subject to the same vulnerability?

[Uraniun235]

I don't see how a bright beam of light would be a problem in a theater; it just makes it that much easier for the staff to find out who's trying to record the movie and kick them out.

[Hotfoot]

CCDs pick up Infrared very clearly (part of why they work so well in low-light situation). Flooding the cinima with infrared light would render CCDs virtually worthless while having no impact on actually watching the movie.

What about CMOS sensors? Are they subject to the same vulnerability?

Good question, I honestly don't know. Do you know the differences between the ways CMOS and CCD work, or perhaps a site that better describes the technology?

[Uraniun235]

The second page of the article says that both CCD and CMOS imagers are vulnerable.

I'm wondering if the system could be overwhelmed by just having a few lenses hanging from your person that were even more reflective than the camera lens.

[Praxis]

Put a mirror in front of your camera, deflect the beam into the audience, ticking off some customer till he complains and makes them shut off the device.

Problem solved.

[Hotfoot]

Put a mirror in front of your camera, deflect the beam into the audience, ticking off some customer till he complains and makes them shut off the device.

Problem solved.

If it's Infrared, nobody will give a shit.

The second page of the article says that both CCD and CMOS imagers are vulnerable.

I'm wondering if the system could be overwhelmed by just having a few lenses hanging from your person that were even more reflective than the camera lens.

Hmm, fair enough. Does it say visible spectrum, or are they just using the public-confusing term "light"?

[Beowulf]

Put a mirror in front of your camera, deflect the beam into the audience, ticking off some customer till he complains and makes them shut off the device.

Problem solved.

Easier... put an infrared filter over the camera. Voila, now they have to use visible light to overload it, thereby making patrons pissed...

[Lancer]

Put a mirror in front of your camera, deflect the beam into the audience, ticking off some customer till he complains and makes them shut off the device.

Problem solved.

Easier... put an infrared filter over the camera. Voila, now they have to use visible light to overload it, thereby making patrons pissed...

tightbeam visible light to blind the camera and spotlight the user so that the staff can confiscate the film and kick the guy out.

Don't see much of a problem.

[Mr Bean]

Easier... put an infrared filter over the camera. Voila, now they have to use visible light to overload it, thereby making patrons pissed...

tightbeam visible light to blind the camera and spotlight the user so that the staff can confiscate the film and kick the guy out.

Don't see much of a problem.[/quote]
The fact it has to activley see the Camera agian. Not to mention as above, people can wear the lense neckleses. And movie employee's can't exactly do strip searches on patrons.


Not to mention it does nothing to stop the best(And semi-most common rips) That done by the film projector operators.