Bodycam footage can both be a tool of surveillance and opprosion (if the police has sole control over how, when and what is used) as well as a tool for dissolving power asymmetries (when use is controlled not by the police). That‘s the important discussion to have, not this weird Amazon discussion.
Your comment on the other hand is (passive) aggressive in tone, unwarranted and out of place in this community.
>Even though the servers are located in Germany, US security and intelligence agencies could access the data, Strasser warned, demanding that the Federal Police expand its capacity "to preserve sovereignty over the core state function of internal security."
For more on this concern, see here.
 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19238119
Integrity is critical as you would never want deletion or editing by unauthorized. But this is pretty easy to protect independent of Amazon.
This seems like a non-issue unless, for some reason unknown to me, they have extra reasons for not wanting the NSA to see bodycam footage. Although I suspect that any German data center is the same, if not more vulnerable.
Why would most videos be released, anyway; especially, in Germany? This is all videos, inclusive of "routine stops" or "health and wellness checks".
>This seems like a non-issue unless, for some reason unknown to me, they have extra reasons for not wanting the NSA to see bodycam footage.
Why would they need extra reasons for not wanting that? Your supposition seems to infer that they should be o.k. with the NSA wanting to see bodycam footage any time that they want?
That makes no sense... That would be akin to saying that the Americans should be fine with the Chinese seeing bodycam videos any time that they choose. If it's not fine for one, why would it be fine for the other?
>Although I suspect that any German data center is the same, if not more vulnerable.
Possibly but they wouldn't be victim to the Cloud Act, yeah?
They even mention it’s encrypted (hopefully on the client end) so it wouldn’t even matter where you put it.
Sure, we can go on how the big cloud providers have all of this and it's small steps, but it's pretty exciting to see a german hoster go into this direction.
But then again their is an non 0 chance that Amazon are not recording everything we say via their echos so they can simulate our voices and ring up all the local shops and tell the owners to go fuck themselves so we have to use amazon for everything...
Either that or the implication is that because the police are using S3 to store bodycam footage, they MUST be using their facial recognition system too.
Edit: Jesus fucking Christ HN, it’s a bloody joke, I thought the part where Amazon are calling owners of local shops would of given that away. Guess I’ll have to be more explicit :-P I’m mocking the article because they state that their is privacy implications because they use AWS. Well their are privacy implications if you use any vendor or even if you self host.
- German police signed a service agreement (probably with Motorola) as the model of bodycam is Motorola Si500. 
- Motorola is one of the service providers working with Amazon. 
"Motorola offers a digital evidence management solution that simplifies the way your agency captures, stores, and manages multi-media content. The solution includes the Si Series Video Speaker Microphone that combines voice communications, body-worn video, still images, voice recording and emergency alerting into one compact, easy-to-use device. Integrated with Motorola’s secure cloud-based CommandCentral Vault digital evidence management software, this solution is streamlining technology and reducing costs for law enforcement everywhere."
- They have some short nice video about their security 
- Basically it is totally cloud solution, although it has client side encryption, if you think Amazon can be compromised, rest of security falls apart too.
> "At the moment there is no state infrastructure available that meets the demand," the Federal Police said.
TL;DR: Government department uses an approved vendor, news at 11.
The mobile version is very difficult to read on my desktop browser.