Filmmakers, Photojournalists Call On Professional Camera Companies To Implement Encryption

24

An open letter written by the Freedom of the Press Foundation and signed by over 150 filmmakers and photojournalists calls on professional camera makers such as Nikon, Canon, Olympus, and Fuji to enable encryption to protect confidential videos from seizure by oppressive governments or criminals. The Freedom of the Press Foundation is a non-profit organization that has several noteworthy members, such as “Pentagon Papers” Daniel Ellsberg, Edward Snowden, and EFF’s co-founder John Perry Barlow, on its board of directors.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
TOPICS
Contributor

Lucian Armasu is a Contributing Writer for Tom's Hardware US. He covers software news and the issues surrounding privacy and security.

  • gggplaya
    Wouldn't encryption slow down write speeds??
    Reply
  • epdm2be
    @GGGPLAYA: Yes.

    "...there is no way to protect any of the footage once it has been taken...."
    Perhaps not once it has been taken. But BEFORE it's taken journalists can copy their photo's to computers/phones/tablets and use appropriate software.

    If ever provided then it should be a user's choice. Not mandatory encryption across all camera's.
    Reply
  • fry178
    any pics/video taken "outside" in public space are not "confidential", hence i doubt this will be fixed "quickly"..
    Reply
  • fry178
    @EPDM2BE
    since most ssd's (also flash mem) come with encryption and they can still handle around 500MB/s (up to 3000MB for pcx drives) read/write.
    please show where there is a significant performance hit when using encryption (vs not encrypted; on same hardware).

    all android phones support encryption, so i doubt it will be an issue on prosumer/pro grade cams, where they can easily add an additional dedicated chip for encryption.
    even a UHD video will only produce ~150-200MB/s, so i dont see why it should be a problem.
    Reply
  • cia1413
    @FRY178 Where is the computation for the encryption going to come from? The asic on a high end camera is 100% occupied with taking pictures, adding a more complex process will just raise the cost. How can you expect a camera manufacturer to solve this very niche problem? Why not have your backup software do this, that is a much cheaper and easier to implement solution. Are the suggesting that they never download the media to reuse cards?
    Reply
  • fry178
    using it with software/afterwards will make it irrelevant for ppl in areas where they arent allowed (for whatever reason) etc.

    "oh, hey mister soldier, let me just encrypt my drive before i hand over my camera..."
    right. so it needs to be on the cam.
    and im not saying it needs to on EVERY camera.
    anyone that uses a camera for work/to make money and needs that kind of feature, should be willing to pay extra for it.

    the most cost would come from r&d on the how/where/what so to speak, but from then on would not add significantly to the cost of the cam.
    same with the chips needed. they are cheap and can be dedicated so it doesnt affect anything else on the cam.

    have you seen the overall lag between something like consumer nikon/canon compared to a sony (when taking a pic in auto mode)?
    i was done shooting 5 pics, when the others werent done with the 3rd pic.
    ergo, there are a lot of other things that will impact a cams performance much more, than something like encryption.
    Reply
  • cia1413
    I work on movie and commercial sets so maybe i just don't get the environment and work flow, but I can't seem to think of ANY situation that someone doing something wrong would let you walk by with a camera period. Do you think that if you walk by someone they would just let you go because they cant see that you have the picture? Thats silly, where I see the encryption helping would be at a checkpoint or if you have to submit your computer equipment and camera for inspection at an airport or something.

    No one i know would just let there data sit on a card without backing it up to at least 2 drives as soon as they can.
    Reply
  • fry178
    its not like we dont have zoom lenses..
    you can be quite far away and still get a relevant pic/video.

    not every country like the press "walking freely" around, and might force to release the storage device to them (or you dont leave).

    with the data being encrypted, at least they wouldnt know what you saw/know.
    Reply
  • anbello262
    19004531 said:
    Wouldn't encryption slow down write speeds??

    Accidentally downvoted you, sorry.

    I am somewhat impressed by the outdated technology used in many "high end" devices. This is something which I have seen not only in high end cameras, but also in many other specialized devices.
    Reply
  • mrmez
    19004883 said:
    any pics/video taken "outside" in public space are not "confidential", hence i doubt this will be fixed "quickly"..

    Speaking as a former photographer, that's ridiculous, and untrue.
    Pretty much every phone today is encrypted, so there are already a COUPLE of encrypted cameras floating around.

    Even photos taken without permission on private property cannot be confiscated by the land owner/security etc. Publishing them however leaves you wide open to legal action.

    There are also laws in most countries preventing a civilian from taking certain photos (kids and nudes without consent), but journalists are exempt from most of these.

    This is a good move, and will happen sooner or later.
    Reply