This is an EU FP7 framework programme. We have indicated before that there are billions of € being spent on ‘research’ projects, and this, in the seventh such programme in the EU, is by far one of the most scary East Germanesc programmes they have undertaken to date.
A quick look at the public deliverables will send shivers down your spine, so what the non public areas are like are anyones guess.
The public area covers everything from personal data collection, behavioural profiling, relationship mining, systems for the autonomus steering and navigation of UAVs, methodology for collection, cleaning and unified representation of large textual data from various sources: news reports, weblogs and chat, a self-organizing computer network architecture and mission planning for groups of UAVs.
All this in a civilian context inside the EU.. a context that the UK government will have no choice but to incorporate into its own security policies.
The Indect website tells us this is ‘for the security of citizens’, how very 1984. This is for the security of the state from the citizens.
Take a look, and be very worried. This is the building of the technological Stasi.
- Deliverable 0.5
- INDECT – Ethical Issues – 2009
- Deliverable 1.1 public version
- Report on the collection and analysis of user requirements
- Deliverable 1.2
- Report on NS and CS hardware construction
- Deliverable 2.1
- Preliminary report on proposed logical structure of the systems
- Deliverable 2.3
- Report on proposed algorithms for positioning, tracking and predicting of the position of tracked objects.
- Deliverable 2.4
- Proposed algorithms for wireless transfer of spatial data
- Deliverable 2.5
- Proposed algorithms and methods for autonomous steering and navigation of UAVs
- Deliverable 2.6
- Proposed algorithms and mechanisms for cooperation within groups of UAVs
- Deliverable 2.7
- Proposed algorithms for mission planning for groups of UAVs
- Deliverable 4.1
- XML Data Corpus: Report on methodology for collection, cleaning and unified representation of large textual data from various sources: news reports, weblogs, chat.
- Deliverable 4.2
- Report on current state-of-the-art methods for relationship mining
- Deliverable 4.3
- Report on current state-of-the-art on machine learning methods for behavioural profiling
- Deliverable 5.1
- Preliminary report on police and prosecutor repositories and access procedures
- Deliverable 6.1
- Intelligent crisis management systems – concepts and usage scenarios
- Deliverable 6.2
- Intelligent portal for crisis management – functional specification and conceptual architecture
- Deliverable 7.1
- Overall self-organizing computer network architecture model
- Deliverable 7.2
- Creation of event model in order to detect dangerous events
- Deliverable 8.1
- Specification of requirements for security and confidentiality of the system
- Deliverable 9.2
- Intelligent Crisis Management Systems – Concepts and Usage Scenarios
- Deliverable 9.3
- Initial plan for using and disseminating knowledge
- Deliverable 9.4
- Evaluation of Components
- Deliverable 9.5
- Report on current state-of-the-art methods for relationship mining
- Deliverable 9.8
- MANET Physical Layer Analysis, MANET MAC Layer Analysis, MANET Routing Protocol Analysis, MANET Self Positioning Alghorithms Analysis
- A quick look at the partners in this project shows the UK interest is already there.
- You may want to download these documents for future reference, before they ‘disappear’..
- UPDATE: Oh look, here is another almost identical project run under the same FP7 programme. this one is called Project DETECTOR being run by Birmingham University.
- Just how much of our taxpayers money do they want to spend to log, tag, catalogue, monitor and ‘detect’ us?
Pingback: Tweets that mention Be very scared at what EU has in store | IanPJ on Politics -- Topsy.com
It will never happen….
oh, that’s ok then.
They promise there won’t be any scope creep and I needn’t have worried anyway, apparently they have an ethics board.
Gawain, the FP6 and now FP7 projects develop research in an iterative fashion. INDECT so far looks like its primary aim is to do the groundwork on practical algorithms for scouring publicly available online information and creation of electronic ‘profiles’ from this.
This work is likely to become the foundation for much more obtrusive capabilities and research projects. It is compartmentalisation, so by happy accident we arrive at sophisticated online surveillance and data gathering capabilities.
One of the splinters of light in the picture however is the fact that the EU requires a substantial amount of information and deliverables to be made publicly available on any FP6 or (now) FP7 projects. There are thousands of these projects and you can find them all here at CORDIS:
I say this is only a splinter of light because, despite being an enormous and freely available research resource, our pliant and quisling media seems uninterested, despite the wealth of data available for something like even INDECT.
Reading Deliverable 4.1 alone will give anyone with a reasonable background in computer science enough information to think of ways to disrupt any INDECT search algorithms.
Pingback: Be very scared at what EU has in store | Centurean2′s Weblog
Pingback: Be very scared at what EU has in store | The Albion Alliance presents
Pingback: There Are Cuts And There Are Cuts | The Albion Alliance presents
Pingback: Shining the light has hit the mark | IanPJ on Politics
It is not about monitoring people total. The draft terms of serious crime search on the Internet. One of the main examples: pedophilia and child pornography. I hope you’re not in favor of child pornography, despite the fact that you criticize the project INDECT.
Ah, that old chestnut, paedophilia and child pornography, 2 of the 4 horsemen of the Infocalypse, the excuse for every piece of authoritarian and draconian legislation and project work.
If that were guaranteed that it would never extend beyond that, few would be concerned, but those of us who follow EU & Governmental projects closely know better. We know that the project scope will creep, its deployment will expand into other areas, and the catchment will go far beyond its original idea.
If the project has nothing to hide, then it will not mind public or parliamentary scrutiny. Does Project INDECT have anything to hide?
In my opinion paedophilia and child pornography ARE a big problem. It is sad you neglect this. 😦
The usage scenario is to build a crawler to find child pornography automatically and submit those lists to INHOPE and/or Police. Is this “authoritarian and draconian”?
As far as “hiding” anything fom public is concerned, please kindly refer to my comment there: https://pjcjournal.wordpress.com/2010/10/19/shining-the-light-has-hit-the-mark/#comment-1483
Firstly you must remember that the FP7 framework, and everything that the Commission and the Commission Services do is paid for with taxpayers money.
Secondly it seems that many need reminding that the EU is NOT a State, therefore it cannot have any State secrets.
Thirdly, you sound as though you do not trust the elected members of the EU Parliament, that you would seek to stop scrutiny of a taxpayer funded project. Irrespective of the aims of that project.
It must also be said that Stalin, Hitler and PolPot had ‘ethics’, however I can confirm that they were not the same as mine, and in a democratic society it is the elected officials who are the guardians of civilised ethics.
Please find my response there: https://pjcjournal.wordpress.com/2010/10/19/shining-the-light-has-hit-the-mark/