Tomorrow’s surveillance technology may be considerably more effective. But each improvement in technology will generally come at the cost of a greater intrusion into the privacy of ordinary citizens. The general public seems unaware of the goals of scientists around the world who have stepped up their efforts to perfect the art of surveillance, hoping to catch criminals and terrorists before they strike.
Research labs envision tools that could identify and track almost anyone, anywhere and sound alarms when systems encounter dangerous devices or chemical compounds. Many of these ideas come from the annals of science fiction. For example, an artificial nose in doors and hallways sniffs out faint traces of explosives in someone’s hair. Tiny sensors floating in the tanks detect a deadly microbe and issue a radio warning. Smart cameras “signal” people from a distance by the way they walk or the shape of their nose. Chemical labs analyze sweat, body odor, and skin flakes on the human thermal plume that represents the halo of heat that surrounds each person.
Consumer demand for video and audio surveillance products is accelerating their development by driving down the cost of underlying technologies. Camera phones, nanny cams, and even satellite photos are common and can be found everywhere. Human sensors are flooding into homes in the form of HIV, pregnancy and diabetes tests, some of which can transmit data to a doctor and soon there will be much more sensitive DNA-based tests to make matching even more precise than ever. The groups are working on radio frequency identification (RFID) tags. These surveillance tags are sold in stores to help track inventory, and 50 people in the US have worn them under their skin to transmit their identification and medical data, in case of an emergency.
These developments portray a society of high-tech surveillance cameras that even science fiction writer George Orwell could not have imagined, a world in which virtually all advances bring benefits as well as personal intrusions. Fast DNA-based probes, for example, could help protect us from biological weapons and diagnose disease, but they could also reveal too much about us to health insurers or prospective employers. Trade-offs are not pretty, in part, because big corporations and governments will continue to use the most advanced surveillance systems. But also, ordinary people will also gain capabilities to monitor their home and surroundings with these advanced consumer technologies, from webcams to Internet search and tracking tools, allowing them to see and be seen from all perspectives.
Here’s an example of what could happen in society: A subway commuter posted on the Internet some photos he took with his cell phone of a passenger who had refused to clean up after his cat relieved himself during the trip. Before long, a mob of Internet vigilantes identified her by her face and the bag she was carrying, and she became the subject of national vilification.
If terrorism becomes a pandemic in Europe and the United States, emerging surveillance tools may be abused in even stranger ways. At the same time, the overhead burdens of a police state could impose crippling costs in a free market economy. Witness the US crackdown on foreign student visas, which could end up limiting the ability of universities to conduct advanced research.
Industry experts disagree on when the most advanced tools to thwart terrorist acts will hit the market and whether they will even deliver what they promise. Sensors that can detect bombs, radiation, and toxins exist today, and will be much more sophisticated within a decade. But spreading them across every city in the United States would cost billions of dollars. High-tech electronic eavesdropping on communications networks can be effective, but only if terrorists use telecommunications systems. But even with the latest improvements in spy cameras, biometric devices like iris scanners, bomb sniffers and tracking software, it will be many years before they can identify a terrorist in the crowd and stop him before he commits his terrorist acts. Sacrifices will be made in society and in governments as our society becomes a surveillance society. The debate will continue for decades to come.
The ultimate universal sensor, small and cheap enough to be scattered in public places, and smart enough to sniff out anything that crosses its path, without being preprogrammed to find specific molecules. No one is close to reaching that goal yet, but Sandia National Laboratories has designed a lab-on-a-chip that detects a variety of chemical and biological agents. It has fine microchannels etched into its surface. When a gas or liquid moves through the tiny pipes, it collides with a special material, and how much it slows down the flow betrays the identity of the fluid. Sandia is now developing this technology to monitor Contra Costa County, California’s water supply.
These systems may not be ready in time for the next attack on a Western country, let alone Egypt or Iraq, but if terrorists attack the US again, the authorities are bound to strike back. Among other things, current restrictions on racial discrimination are likely to collapse. So what will we do? In the arms race against suicide bombers, will surveillance technologies prove their worth?
Some governments have already used Electronic Monitoring to foil terrorist plots, and portals that detect weapons and explosives make airports safer. Unfortunately, many of the most powerful technologies are simply too new. It may be a decade or more before biochemical sensor networks are ready to cover an entire city. And it could be a long time before camera systems can pick out the face of a known terrorist or in the crowd. For now, only a combination of electronic monitoring and human intelligence has a chance of keeping radicals at bay.
Meanwhile, scientists working on surveillance prototypes are encouraged that their innovations may bring health care and food safety benefits. Over time, people can get smarter about how to live with threats and make use of technology without undermining their most basic values. A country that sacrifices the freedom of its citizens in the fight to protect them is not a hero.