> The department of justice said Victoria’s infection was not the result of a targeted attack, but was caused by a contractor mistakenly connecting infected hardware to cameras.
Some sources are calling this a USB stick, the Guardian is being a bit more cautious.
Interesting, I always assumed the cameras transmitted the photos and data back to a source over mobile networks.
Technically this means if someone gets snapped and is desperate enough ( will lose job as a result of losing licence etc ) they can turn back and destroy the evidence.
Now that you mention it, i recall reading about a local case where someone tried to take out a camera using dynamite.
This revealed that the actual image storage was in a hardened cased buried in the ground some distance from the camera.
I suspect though that these are older installs. And that newer ones, particularly those that issue tickets based on time between two cameras, are networked.
