... in Australia

Quote :

"August 10, 2005 EVERY fine issued by speed cameras could be invalid, after the Roads and Traffic Authority admitted yesterday it could not prove the authenticity of the pictures they take. In a double blow to the RTA, The Daily Telegraph can also reveal that Sydney Harbour Tunnel cameras monitoring toll cheats have been switched off for at least three years - and no penalties handed out. The revelation came as Sydney magistrate Lawrence Lawson threw out a speeding case after the RTA said it had no evidence that an image from a camera had not been doctored. Mr Lawson had adjourned the case in June, giving the RTA eight weeks to produce an expert to prove pictures from a speed camera on Carlingford Rd, Epping, had not been altered after they were taken. He said it was a matter of public interest and the RTA should be given time to back up its case. But RTA lawyers yesterday told Hornsby Local Court they could not find an expert and the case was thrown out, with $3300 in legal costs awarded to the motorist, a man allegedly caught speeding through a school zone on November 18 last year. Lawyer Dennis Miralis, who has won several high-profile cases against the RTA involving speeding motorists, said the case proved a public inquiry into speed cameras was desperately needed. "The integrity of all speed camera offences has been thrown into serious doubt and it appears that the RTA is unable to prove any contested speed camera matter because of a lack of admissible evidence," Mr Miralis said. The case revolved around the integrity of a mathematical MD5 algorithm published on each picture and used as a security measure to prove pictures have not been doctored after they have been taken. Mr Miralis argued that the RTA had to prove the algorithm it used was accurate and could not be tampered with. He said: "It is our understanding that since speed cameras were introduced approximately 15 years ago on NSW roads, not one single speed camera photograph has been capable of proving an offence." The NSW Law Society said the judgment could "open the doors" for other drivers caught by speed cameras to mount the same defence. http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,16204811-1242,00.htm "

[Edited on August 15, 2005 at 4:59 PM. Reason : location]

8/15/2005 4:52:59 PM

Sydney

8/15/2005 4:55:25 PM

They were testing a speed camera system in Charlotte a few months ago. I'm not sure if they are still doing it or not.

8/15/2005 6:04:03 PM

I have been under the impression that the legal system in the USA grants a person the right to confront their accuser, thus providing a sizeable loophole for camera tickets. Is this true?

8/15/2005 6:07:22 PM

you can see your accuser
its the officer that signs the back of the ticket they mail you

8/15/2005 6:10:01 PM

^ Very wrong. You're being accused by the state. Thus, you face their representitive, the DA or ADA.

8/15/2005 6:11:03 PM

well anyways, you can see someone
safelight (or whoever is around here) told me it was the officer

8/15/2005 6:16:27 PM

its not considered a moving violation
its treated like a parking ticket basically
one doesn't need to see the officer that leaves a ticket on your windshield wiper.

8/15/2005 6:42:40 PM

I don't understand what the big deal. Wilmington has had cameras for years, and after the first few months, I rarely saw issues about it in the news. You just are a little more cautious at those intersections, which is their purpose.

8/15/2005 7:22:11 PM

^

READ: SPEED

NOT: RED LIGHT

8/15/2005 7:24:20 PM

I remember they implimented mobile speed cameras in Hawaii a few years back. There were a rediculous number of tickets issued. Radio shows would camera reports telling drivers where the ambushes were reportedly located that day. Public furor got so high that the state government was forced to take them out of service. (They worked perfectly fine otherwise...)

This also reminds me of the ticketing system they used on the New Jersey turnpike. They would ticket you based upon the time it took for you to get from one exit to another; essentially, they knew the minimum time it would take for you to go from one exit to the next on the turnpike, and if you got off the turnpike under that minimum, they could calculate how much you were speeding and issue you a ticket. The system worked extremely well, but people got so pissed that they finally had to remove it.

8/16/2005 1:56:41 PM

Quote :

"The revelation came as Sydney magistrate Lawrence Lawson threw out a speeding case after the RTA said it had no evidence that an image from a camera had not been doctored."

That's kinda weird.
I have no proof that I've never killed anyone. I can try to produce some proof, but it will never be completely bulletproof. (true, opposite of the spectrum and the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing and not the other way around, but how the hell are you supposed to prove that an image was not doctored? seems quite impossible to me.)

8/16/2005 2:22:53 PM

im surprised they even thought that enforcing the letter of the law would be pragmatic.

8/16/2005 2:27:50 PM

this is already posted - i believe in the lounge possibly or soapbox

8/16/2005 2:37:02 PM

This had to do with the MD5 hash that was created from the image. Apparently, they used it to store the speed as well as other information.

A Chinese group were able to change info. from the image while leaving the MD5 hash the same as the original.

That's why the guy won his dispute.

http://www.theregister.com/2005/08/11/oz_speed_camera_case/

8/16/2005 3:39:50 PM

Quote :

"Since the [Chinese] research came out, we've been recommending that clients move away from MD5 and we've certainly recommended that people don't use it for new applications."

I hate those cameras as much as anybody else but I think this is the greater concern at hand. Anybody have a number for what % of software uses MD5?

[Edited on August 16, 2005 at 7:11 PM. Reason : .]

8/16/2005 7:11:29 PM

Windows uses it... I believe.

And most open-source programs use an MD5 hash to ensure that what you downloaded is legit.



Yes, this could be a big problem. I don't know of any other programs off the top of my head that use MD5 for encryption.

[Edited on August 17, 2005 at 1:04 PM. Reason : add]

8/17/2005 1:02:12 PM