this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2025
98 points (98.0% liked)

Privacy

41787 readers
941 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

So I had researched it a while ago and don't recall having found anything effective and non-suspicious to protect from public camera mass survaillence in cities and the like. Is there anything that is a good option for that yet, and if so, could you point me toward it?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] autonomoususer@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

You learning how to make other people directly around you care. Start with the easy stuff, like helping them leave WhatsApp and Discord.

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 7 points 18 hours ago (3 children)

Handheld scanning infrared laser, 5 to 50 watts Basically laser-clean the sensor out of existence

[–] grahamja@reddthat.com 1 points 3 hours ago

In the past, individuals have cut down red light and speed cameras using power saws. Are you suggesting a laser would be easier to just burn the pixels of the camera? Wouldn't that be dangerous for people around you?

[–] TheCoralReefsAreDying69@lemmy.world 6 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

5 to 50 watts

And blinding everyone around you too!

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 6 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

You're going to need a rather tight beam to hit that camera and it will only for milliseconds. It would take really bad luck to hit someone continuously long enough through a reflection (drastic reduction in power level by then) to damage their eyesight, plus camera optics are not very reflective of infrared as they need it for night vision, so they're especially sensitive. But yes, this should be treated with the seriousness of a gun.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 hours ago

You know cameras have an IR filter during the day right.

[–] twice_hatch@midwest.social 1 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

At that point I'd just spray paint them. Much safer, easy to buy in cash, and I assume it costs a lot to send someone to clean it up

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Sure if you have a drone but it's not nearly as discreet as a fiber+ lens in your sleeve

[–] lime@feddit.nu 1 points 4 hours ago

they do record, so it will be quite obvious which person suddenly starts looking like a star in the footage.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

where do i find me one of those

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 4 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

electronics and industrial supply places, you can rip it off a diode based laser cutter but they're very chonk, if you're handy, you'd get just the diodes, lens and then make your own PCB with powersupply. You need adjustable because the light has to be in focus at the distance between you and the camera or else it will be to diffuse to disable the sensor, both too short and too far. You don't really need a galvo head in this case just mount the pcb on something that can randomnly vibrate the laser in a small radius at the effective distance. You won't be able to hit the camera sensor steady, you need to paint over it randomnly, with the right focus it will work even on rare occasionnal hits since those sensor are very sensitive to laser light

[–] StopSpazzing@lemmy.world 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Just add adruino with a distance sensing laser to point it it first to have it adjust focal length of the dangerous laser.

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 hours ago

Yes that makes sense, the range finding sensor from an old cell phone should do nicely.
You can 3d print a geared lens barrel for small M12 lens quite easily.
Just map the values to real gear position and bingo's your uncle !

[–] willington@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

You need to own a few copies of face recog software, and practice with face restructuring latex makeup which gives you a new realistic face with a new bone structure.

Change walking gate. Get shoes with small platforms to change height, learn to walk naturally on those.

Change mannerisms.

It's doable, but a major pain to pull it off.

Like imagine quickly applying the latex makeup, walking in front of your own identical face recognition camera at home, take everything off, rest, repeat, 10 times a day, 300 days a year, for 10 years. Until it is second nature. Now you can rely on this to do serious work.

You have to create a new person, basically. Assuming you practiced well and tested everything against real software, you can now be a different person for some hours in a reliable way. Once your secondary identity is exposed you'll need a new tertiary identity. Never do anythiny fishy as your base identity.

The real solution is political, like everyone else has said. Because you won't be able to fool the system casually without a massive effort and practice, practice, practice on your own property first, before you rely on this for real work in the wild.

[–] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It depends on the surveillance coverage. If it’s widespread enough, they can track you between your departure and arrival locations. You’d also need two more disguises for both entering and exiting.

And of course, if you have a cell phone on you that pings anything, the jig is up.

[–] birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

For the cell phones, faraday cage bags would be a solution.

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 37 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

There is no effective technical solution for political problems. If you find one, it will soon be outlawed or rendered ineffective (eg if you wear mask and sunglasses, prepare to be harassed by law enforcement). Lobbying to stop unconstrained surveillance is the only option.

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (3 children)

If there is no other option than lobbying then there is no real option. The public has rarely ever effectively lobbied for their interests.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 6 points 17 hours ago

may i suggest revolution?

[–] twice_hatch@midwest.social 1 points 15 hours ago

Press forward

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I wouldn't be so pessimistic. When more people personally experience survelliance abuse, things will get interesting.

[–] fubbernuckin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 15 hours ago

I think the public is staggeringly bad at advocating for their own interests.

[–] Highlow@piefed.social 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] hector@lemmy.today 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Gorilla mask. Or one of those 6 foot tall bunny costumes. Or uncle sam ala carnivals a hundred years back.

[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 68 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Came here to suggest that. We need to gather sentiment

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] brownmustardminion@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

IR blocking sunglasses are the simplest and most practical solution.

Facial recognition systems compare the distance ratios between your eyes and nose primarily. Hiding your eyes is very effective towards fucking that up. A mask alone is typically not enough.

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Sunglasses alone are not enough either. Modern face recognition tech is way better than just distance ratios

[–] brownmustardminion@lemmy.ml 4 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

Got any further info about these more advanced methods?

I haven't seen anything beyond the feature distance models. I have seen the models that essentially recreate you entire anatomy in 3D, place it in a database, then use that profile to match to in the future--almost like a 3D match move artist would do for visual effects. Not sure if this is just a proof of concept though.

I wouldn't be surprised if the millimeter wave scanners at airports have been collecting 3D models of us for this database over the last decades.

[–] sobchak@programming.dev 2 points 5 hours ago

I'd guess they probably just have a big blackbox ML image model now. A lot of computer vision tasks are being replaced by blackbox models.

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I don't have any specific technical info. I just know that even 3 years ago the face recognition tech in Moscow could successfully match people even with sunglasses on.

[–] brownmustardminion@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 hours ago

The question is whether they were using infrared to see through normal sunglasses. IR blocking sunglasses prevent "night vision" from seeing through the lenses. Under infared, you can see through normal dark sunglasses like they aren't even there.

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 35 points 1 day ago (8 children)

Covid masks can be effective, and it's not as suspicious as asymmetrical makeup or a reflective hoodie. But no, there's no good way to avoid being photographed in public.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] mugita_sokiovt@discuss.online 18 points 1 day ago

Mask, sunglasses (and glasses that block IR), slight deviations in movement patterns, and GETTING OUT OF THE CITY.

[–] damnthefilibuster@lemmy.world 25 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)
load more comments
view more: next ›