this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2025
105 points (98.2% liked)

Privacy

41960 readers
532 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
[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 72 points 1 week ago (6 children)
[–] sic_semper_tyrannis@lemmy.today 13 points 1 week ago

Came here to suggest that. We need to gather sentiment

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 38 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week 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 10 points 1 week ago (4 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 7 points 1 week ago

may i suggest revolution?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 37 points 1 week ago (1 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.

[–] SendMePhotos@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I read somewhere they they can identify you typically with about 35% of your face.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 13 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Yeah, a high-res image giving the position of ears, eyes, and nose is damning.

ears and eyes alone give you a shocking amount of identifyability. We're getting real fucking close to the CSI levels of facial identification.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 week ago

glasses and face masks it is then

[–] icelimit@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Mask and sunglasses? Then put random things in your shoe everyday to change your gait?

[–] damnthefilibuster@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)
[–] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 31 points 1 week ago (4 children)
[–] bmpvy@feddit.org 7 points 1 week ago

Thanks for sharing, what an amazing read^^

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] willington@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 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.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 19 points 1 week ago
[–] mugita_sokiovt@discuss.online 18 points 1 week ago

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

[–] brownmustardminion@lemmy.ml 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week 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 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

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

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Highlow@piefed.social 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] plyth@feddit.org 11 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Don't forget that when you walk the length of your bones can be measured which can be used to identify you.

[–] irmadlad@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I guess we can all join The Ministry of Silly Walks.

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Walk on the front of your foot, the process require you to intentionally concentrate on your gait which causes it to change

Not that you can do it all of the time, but it is a way to defeat gait fingerprinting.

[–] scytale@piefed.zip 14 points 1 week ago

Walk without rhythm.

[–] machiavellian@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Just as normal sunglasse don't fool facial recognition systems, modern gait recognition systems can't be defeated by "just altering how you walk". You can read more about it on The Hitchhikers Guide to Online Anonymity. There is this research paper.

They link a specific device which can fool some systems, but a bit easier (although more inefficient) is just wearing very loose clothes that cover the movement of your muscles.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] favoredponcho@lemmy.zip 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yea, but there is a database of peoples faces matched to their names. There is not a database of their bone lengths to the names. That measurement would be done after you were already under suspicion.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] damnthefilibuster@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Is that part of gait measurement or separate from it?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 week ago (6 children)

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

[–] grahamja@reddthat.com 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

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?

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 days ago

Yes, it is dangerous even the reflections off the camera could be dangerous. This requires the same awareness of others as handling a laser cleaner.
Here is an article about using a pulse laser to blind a camera sensor
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/physics/articles/10.3389/fphy.2024.1345859/full

[–] TheCoralReefsAreDying69@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

5 to 50 watts

And blinding everyone around you too!

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 week ago (8 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 6 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Even a 1 watt laser will still have enough power after the filter to knock that sensor's clock right out.
Or just use a red laser, they're even cheaper, if less discrete.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] irmadlad@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Mask or neck gator, dark shades, toboggan hat or head scarf/wrap that covers your ears. Ears are just about as identifiable as fingerprints.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 1 week ago (3 children)

IR LEDs around your hat or glasses but I believe some cameras can filter out IR.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 week ago

Yeah, no dice, the better sensors these days don't have any problem with that. Check out Project Farms recent doorbell camera review. He actually walks up to the doorbell camera with a full on flashlight in the pitch black of night and they still have no problem.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

For surveillance cams:

Cover them up and destroy them with drones.

[–] m532@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 1 week ago

Artillery strikes on the data centers

[–] autonomoususer@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

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

load more comments
view more: next ›