
Privacy Advocate Held at Gunpoint After License Plate Reader Database Mistake - rmason
https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/21/18234785/privacy-advocate-lawsuit-california-license-plate-reader
======
T3OU-736
GiGo still applies.

(US-centric view, YMWcV)

Sadly, the mechanisms for feeding data into these various databases are held
as confidential under the auspices of protecting the TTPs. This makes it
impossible to have proper oversight from people who understand data lifecycles
(I am not counting myself in that category). The courts, the usual remedy for
this sort of things, aren't as helpful, because a) they rely on a specific
case to be brought (see: Stingray devices and coirt cases being dropped to
protect them), and because "parallel construction" is, sadly, a thing.

While keeping TTPs (tactics/techniques/procedures) isn't, on it's face,
invalid as a reason, for _public_ law enforcement that seems to be iffy. There
is already a whole list of things which slews the power dynamic towards the
gov't, the public LE agencies should not be allowed to claim secrecy as one of
them.

They want to be secret agent? Sure. But the rules are waaay different, and you
don't get all the nice comfy protections already codified into law, then.

The sherrif's deputies in this particular story are in an inenviable position.
Odd that a stole car (rather than a carjacking) required a response involving
threats of lethal force to ensure compliance, but aside from that, they had no
way to know what the specific circumstances were until they investigated.
Wonder if there wasn't a more effective way to determine innocence (was the
car search necessary, or just conducted because they could, while they already
had the car pulled over and people in custody?)

Doubt anything will happen from the suit. _Maybe_ that particular database's
procedure for data accuracy will be examined, but probably not.

