A new report from the Government Accounting Office reveals that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) plans to nearly triple the number of surveillance towers along U.S. borders, from the current 830 to 2,300 by 2034.

DHS expects to expend $1 billion in taxpayer dollars for this dangerous expansion of a surveillance network indiscriminately trained on towns, school playgrounds, backyards, and vehicles—threatening the privacy and civil liberties of everyone in the border regions.

The towers are planned as part of DHS component Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) Integrated Surveillance Tower (IST) program, which captures images of people and vehicles. The IST program operates autonomous surveillance towers, consisting of autonomous surveillance towers, consisting of AI-based systems using radar, thermal infrared and optical systems to track targets over long distances; integrated fixed towers, optimized for surveilling foot traffic and vehicles; and remote video surveillance systems, which can often be found very close to the border fence in Arizona, including residential neighborhoods where cameras are capable of spying on homes on both sides of the border. (For a description and photos of these technologies, see EFF’s updated guide to surveillance at the U.S.-Mexico Border.)

DHS expects to purchase more long-range autonomous towers and to upgrade existing towers with autonomous capabilities. The $1 billion comes from the so-called One Big Beautiful Act—a massive tax and spending law that President Trump signed in 2025, the report says.

The explosive expansion of border surveillance is a digital dumpster fire for human rights and civil liberties. It’s not just surveillance towers; drones, aerostats, surveillance vehicles, ground sensors, game cameras, and license plate readers are also part of the vast taxpayer-funded infrastructure that threatens all those who live, work, or seek refuge in the borderlands. This technology isn’t exclusive to U.S. federal agencies: it’s also deployed by state and local law enforcement, and even by governments on the Mexican side.

Since 2022, EFF has studied and mapped surveillance technology along the U.S.-Mexico border using public records research, open-source intelligence, and fact-finding trips, and created a handy interactive map to provide researchers and journalists with the tools they need to analyze the impact of U.S. border security policy. We have also documented the different types of surveillance technology in a zine, "Surveillance Technology at the U.S.-Mexico Border." We updated the publication earlier this year to help people identify the machinery of homeland security by adding more models of surveillance towers, newly deployed military tech, and a gallery of disguised trail cams and automated license plate readers.

EFF’s work includes defending the rights of individuals whose devices have been searched or seized upon entering the country; pushing back on the collection of biometric and social media identifiers; and developing digital security guidance for people crossing borders.

With the web of surveillance tech at the borders about to explode, EFF will continue to investigate and expose it and find ways to fight back with the communities that live in the shadow of this technological threat to human rights.

There’s a new boogeyman in the battles over AI: so-called “stealth crawlers.” We’ll admit it—the term “stealth crawlers” sounds quite nefarious. In reality, they’re anything but.

“Stealth crawlers” are simply automated tools to access and collect public web data—without disclosing the user’s identity. Private crawlers like these facilitate all kinds of important work that benefits the public, including investigative reporting, academic research, cybersecurity protection, and more.

Many publishers want to unmask crawlers anyways—and are pushing for new legislation that would give them new powers to do so. These legislative proposals threaten the open web, user privacy, and valuable research without directly addressing the problems they’re supposedly intending to solve.

Alarmingly, these harmful proposals are gaining traction. The New York state legislature has already passed such a bill, the NY Stealth Crawler Protection Act, which is now on Governor Hochul’s desk. We expect to see similar bills introduced in other states, and potentially in Congress. That’s a big problem for the open web—and the many benefits it provides.

Anonymous crawling is worth protecting

Anonymous crawling enables some of the most publicly beneficial uses of the open web. Researchers, journalists, and other watchdog groups use unidentified automated tools to gather the information necessary to hold powerful institutions accountable and protect the public.

Anonymous crawling fuels important investigative journalism. For example, The Markup, a non-profit news site, used anonymous crawlers to investigate potentially anti-competitive practices by tech companies, such as Amazon’s tendency to prioritize Amazon brands and Amazon-exclusive products over competitors with higher ratings. The crawlers identified themselves as ordinary Firefox browsers to web servers, which allowed The Markup to understand how Amazon search results pages would appear to ordinary users. Similarly, ProPublica used an automated tool designed to simulate an ordinary Amazon customer to reveal that the site steered shoppers to more expensive products over cheaper alternatives.

Anonymous web scraping is also crucial for cybersecurity professionals, who use automated tools to monitor the web for information that helps them protect against malicious attackers. Privacy tools, including EFF’s own Privacy Badger, also crawl sites anonymously to identify trackers without compromising user privacy.

However, without the ability to scrape anonymously, these tools would likely be blocked. Sites can—and do—block crawlers operated by researchers, journalists, and activists who criticize them. For example, Facebook shut down accounts belonging to researchers who used automated tools to study misinformation on the platform and demanded that they take down published research. Many sites block automated access by anyone who hasn’t paid to crawl public webpages.    

Unmasking crawlers threatens the open web

News publishers—and their allies in government—say that unmasking crawlers is necessary to protect news organizations from technological strain caused by AI-related crawling, and fears that AI could reduce news sites’ traffic and ad revenue. These are legitimate concerns.

But enacting broad, reactionary restrictions on automated access is not the answer. Legislation targeting anonymous crawling threatens the open web, user privacy, and valuable research without actually addressing these technological and potential economic harms of scraping.

The New York state legislature recently passed the NY Stealth Crawler Protection Act, a law that would make it illegal to crawl news websites without revealing who is operating the crawler and all possible future uses of the data collected by the crawler. The law would give websites the power to obtain court orders that unmask anyone using an unidentified crawler—without any evidence that they broke the law.

Laws like the New York bill sweep far beyond AI, and do not meaningfully address the technological or potential harms of AI-related web scraping. These policies would chill beneficial crawling by allowing publishers to veto lawful public access, giving them the power to block not just bad actors, but also security professionals, researchers, dissidents, or anyone who has not paid for a license to view public text. This needlessly undermines the free and open internet.

Digital news publishers—like most websites—face real technological challenges in the AI era. While web crawling has been around for decades, with the proliferation of AI, crawlers now collect far more public web data than they used to. This pushes servers closer to their maximum capacity, and if some bots collect information too aggressively, they may strain web servers to the point that it degrades site performance. The problem is not anonymity—so unmasking crawlers won’t solve it. The real problem is overaggressive crawling, which can be effectively addressed with technical measures that target harmful conduct without impeding anonymous access to information.

A better path forward

There are other, far less harmful ways to protect publishers from the harms these “stealth crawler” laws claim to target. Addressing the harms of AI-related crawling requires policies that narrowly target the causes of these issues–without undermining free expression and the open web. Policies that target crawlers and scrapers are anything but.

A physician and neuroscientist who studies how anesthesia affects the brain; a leader in aerospace engineering, policy, and education; and the founding head of MIT’s Department of Biological Engineering have been awarded MIT’s highest faculty honor: the title of Institute Professor.

With the appointments of Emery Brown, Daniel Hastings SM ’78, PhD ’80, and Douglas Lauffenburger, there are now 12 Institute Professors at MIT, along with 10 Institute Professors Emeriti.

The appointments, which took effect July 1, were announced today in an email to the faculty from Sally Kornbluth, MIT’s president; Anantha Chandrakasan, MIT provost; and Roger Levy, chair of the faculty and a professor of brain and cognitive sciences. 

Emery Brown

Brown, who has been a member of the MIT faculty since 2005, says he is “tremendously honored” to be appointed as an Institute Professor.

“It’s a pleasure to know that your colleagues hold you in such high esteem and that the work that you’re doing is valued,” says Brown, who is the Edward Hood Taplin Professor of Medical Engineering and Computational Neuroscience, an investigator at The Picower Institute for Learning and Memory, and a professor in the Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences and the Institute for Medical Engineering and Science. “When you look down the list of people who have had this title, it’s an amazing group.”

After graduating from Harvard University with a bachelor’s degree in applied mathematics in 1978, Brown earned a PhD in statistics, also from Harvard, and an MD from Harvard Medical School. Since 1992, he has been a member of the Harvard Medical School faculty, and until recently he was a practicing anesthesiologist at Massachusetts General Hospital. 

Throughout his career, Brown has made contributions in several different areas of neuroscience. In the early stages of his research career, he developed statistical methods to characterize the properties of the human circadian clock. He showed how light exposure can shift the phase of the human clock, depending on the circadian phase during which the light is administered. He also developed methods to demonstrate, from analyses of physiological data collected under special low-light conditions, that the intrinsic period of the human clock, like that of other species, is closer to 24 hours and not 25. Brown also measured the impact of shift work schedules that were designed using circadian physiology. 

Later, he developed new statistical techniques and signal processing methods to analyze data collected in systems neuroscience experiments. As part of this work, he devised algorithms to decode the position of an animal in its environment by reading the activity of a small group of place cell neurons in the animal’s brain. 

Joining MIT’s faculty just over 20 years ago represented an “inflection point” in his career, Brown says. 

“I was an anesthesiologist doing statistical research, interested in neuroscience, and MIT allowed me to tie all those together,” he says. “I could work with colleagues who could help me understand the neuroscience of anesthesia, have another outlet for the statistical research that I was doing, and also more direct interactions with undergraduates and grad students.”

Over the past two decades, Brown has applied statistical techniques to studying what happens to the brain under anesthesia. His work has revealed how drugs such as propofol alter the brain’s intrinsic oscillations, which can be seen with electroencephalography (EEG).

During the awake state, these oscillations usually have high frequencies and low amplitudes, but as anesthetic drugs are given, they shift to low frequencies and high amplitudes. These changes disrupt normal communication between different brain regions, leading to loss of consciousness.

Brown has also shown that these EEG oscillations can be used to monitor whether a patient is too deeply unconscious, and he has developed a closed-loop anesthesia delivery system that can monitor these oscillations in real-time and guide anesthetic dosing during surgery. 

In 2024, Brown was presented with the National Medal of Science. Among his other awards, he is also a recipient of a National Institute of Health Director’s Pioneer Award, the Gruber Prize in Neuroscience, and the Swartz Prize for Computational and Theoretical Neuroscience. He one of a small group of researchers to be an elected member of all three National Academies of Medicine, Sciences, and Engineering, as well as the National Academy of Inventors.

From 2012 to 2022, he served as co-director of the Harvard-MIT Program in Health Sciences and Technology. He has also played an instrumental role in several important efforts at MIT, including the 2010 Report on the Initiative for Faculty Race and Diversity, and the founding of the MIT Institute for Data, Systems, and Society (IDSS) in 2015.

Outside of his work at MIT, Brown served on President Obama’s Brain Initiative Working Group, as well as the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Women in Science and Engineering and the Council of the National Institutes of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.

Brown is also known for his commitment to teaching and mentoring students. In 2024, he was named a recipient of MIT’s “Committed to Caring” award — an honor given by MIT’s Office of Graduate Education to faculty members who have served as exceptional mentors to graduate students.

Daniel Hastings

When Hastings, the Cecil (1923) and Ida Green Professor in Education, was notified of the new distinction, it came as a total surprise.

“The people who were there will tell you that I could not believe it at first,” he says. “I never thought of myself as being in the same league as some of the Institute Professors I knew.”

Hastings grew up in England and Jamaica, and developed an early fascination with space, as a fan of the fictional “Star Trek,” and later “Star Wars” and “Stargate” (he’s seen every episode and movie of all three franchises), as well as the very real NASA Apollo program. 

After receiving a bachelor’s degree in mathematics from Oxford University, he enrolled at MIT, earning his master’s degree in 1978 and PhD in 1980, both in aeronautics and astronautics. In 1985 he joined the faculty as an assistant professor and was promoted to full professor in 1993. 

Throughout his tenure, Hastings has made significant and lasting impacts in astronautical engineering, particularly through his studies in space plasma environment interactions, electric propulsion, and space systems architecture. 

His early research on the physical interactions between plasma and spacecraft, for which he co-wrote the definitive text (“Spacecraft Environment Interactions,” published in 1996), enabled the safe operation of solar panels on spacecraft today. Prior to Hastings’ work, high voltage solar arrays on satellites often experienced catastrophic arcing — a dangerous jumping of electrical current from one panel to another. These failures turned out to be a result of interactions with the surrounding space plasma. 

Hastings developed theories to characterize these interactions. His theories informed NASA’s design of the solar panels to power the International Space Station, which are still in operation today. His work also established guidelines across the aerospace industry on the design of resilient solar panels and ways to handle issues once in orbit. 

In his studies of electric propulsion, Hastings characterized the fundamental physical interactions between ion engine plumes and spacecraft systems. His work was pivotal in incorporating ion propulsion systems into many commercial satellites and deep space probes and helped to push what was an experimental technology into mainstream use in space propulsion.

In his more recent work, Hastings has explored the concept of flexible and distributed space architectures. He and his students are developing models for spacecraft that can serve purposes beyond their original mission intent. For instance, a spacecraft may incorporate a port that could serve as a waystation for future satellites to dock and refuel. Such a flexible and distributed system could help to support future missions to the moon and Mars.

In recognition of his research contributions, Hastings received the AIAA Losey Atmospheric Sciences Award in 2002, was elected to the National Academy of Engineering in 2017, and was recognized as an honorary fellow of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) in 2021. 

Throughout his career, Hastings has taken on numerous leadership roles, at the national, international, and Institute levels. Shortly after becoming full professor, he served as associate department head of research in MIT’s Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AeroAstro). He then took a two-year leave from the Institute to serve as chief scientist of the U.S. Air Force. During that time, he advised the Air Force chief of staff and secretary and successfully strengthened investments in space research in the U.S.  Air Force space program. 

Hastings has served as an advisor on multiple expert panels and boards, including as the chair of the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, and as a member of the NASA Advisory Council, the National Science Board, the Intelligence Science Board, and most recently, the Defense Science Board and User Advisory Group of the National Space Council. He has also chaired multiple National Research Council studies and advised the space and engineering industries in various capacities, including serving on the boards of the Aerospace Corporation, Draper, and Blue Origin. He has just finished a two-year term as president of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.

At MIT, Hastings has stepped up to serve in pivotal leadership posts. From 2000 to 2005, he served as the director of MIT’s Technology and Policy Program, then director of the Engineering Systems Division. From 2006 to 2013, as dean for undergraduate education, he helped to develop initiatives in equity, financial aid, and curriculum development, and strengthened international education and study abroad programs during a nationally challenging economic period. He received the Gordon Y. Billard Award in 2013 for his work on international education. In 2014 he began a five-year term as director of the Singapore-MIT Alliance for Research and Technology, during which he worked to reinforce MIT’s global collaborations. And from 2019 to 2023 he served as head of AeroAstro, supporting new research and educational initiatives as he navigated the department through the global pandemic.

Hastings has also worked in multiple capacities to make the Institute a more welcoming and inclusive community. He has served as associate dean of engineering for diversity, equity, and inclusion (2021-2023), Institute Community and Equity Officer (interim, 2023-2024), and co-chair of the MIT Values Statement Committee, as well as vice chancellor for undergraduate and graduate education (interim, 2024-2025). 

“MIT has been a great place for me,” Hastings reflects. “It has a mission to address some of the most pressing problems in the world. It is a high-energy place. This is a place that I am excited to work in and I want to give back to make it better.”

Douglas Lauffenburger

Lauffenburger, who is the Ford Professor of Biological Engineering, Chemical Engineering, and Biology, was the central founder of MIT’s Department of Biological Engineering, which he chaired from its inception in 1998 until 2019.

Before coming to MIT, Lauffenburger earned his undergraduate degree from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in 1975 and a PhD from the University of Minnesota at the Twin Cities in 1979, both in chemical engineering. 

While in graduate school, he became fascinated by the biological sciences. Early in his career, as a faculty member at the University of Pennsylvania and at the University of Illinois, his research and teaching straddled the line between chemical engineering and cell biology. Due to his unique background, MIT recruited Lauffenburger in the late 1990s to launch its new Department of Biological Engineering.

At the time, many universities had programs in biomedical engineering — an interdisciplinary field that applies techniques from electrical, chemical, or mechanical engineering to medical problems. Lauffenburger envisioned a distinct discipline of biological engineering, in which engineers would pursue an understanding of how biological systems function at the level of molecular and cellular mechanisms, with the goal of manipulating them to create new technologies for applications across medicine, energy, the environment, nutrition, and manufacturing.

“What was clear to me was that because biological systems comprise molecular processes, which are integrated in very complex ways, a true engineering analysis and design approach ought to be useful in moving it beyond mere tinkering and trial-and-error,” he says. “We needed to develop engineering frameworks for biology based on design principles, models, and predictions.”

As department head, Lauffenburger guided the development of new curricula at both graduate and undergraduate levels, and recruited faculty members whose work spanned engineering, molecular and cellular biology, microbiology, and immunology. The new department began offering graduate degrees in the late 1990s, and an undergraduate major beginning in 2005. Since its inception, the program has served as a model for similar programs at many other institutions worldwide.

Lauffenburger described being named an Institute Professor as “an honor that is especially gratifying because it recognizes the extraordinary impact of our unique MIT biological engineering department. I’ve been blessed with the rare opportunity to help create something revolutionary, here in this remarkable institution.”

Lauffenburger also played key roles in launching new interdisciplinary programs within MIT and with other institutions, including the Center for Biomedical Engineering, the Computational and Systems Biology Initiative, the DuPont-MIT Alliance, and the Cambridge-MIT Initiative.

His research has touched on many areas of biological science, including molecular cell biology, systems biology, and computational biology. Much of his work focuses on unraveling cell signaling mechanisms, using a combination of computational modeling and quantitative experiments. This work has shed light on processes such as cell proliferation, death, adhesion, and migration.

In the field of systems biology, he has created computational models across a spectrum of mathematical approaches, which can be used to identify drug targets and patient stratification strategies for a variety of diseases, including cancer and chronic inflammation, and predict the efficacy of drugs against those targets. 

In 2021, he and Linda Griffith, the School of Engineering Professor of Teaching Innovation at MIT, were jointly awarded the Bernard M. Gordon Prize for Innovation in Engineering and Technology Education, the most prestigious engineering education award in the United States.

Lauffenburger is an elected member of the National Academy of Engineering and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He is a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, a founding fellow of the American Institute for Medical and Biological Engineering, and has served as president of the Biomedical Engineering Society.

A recent story of a writer who was mistakenly identified, tracked, and arrested using data from Flock cameras has gone viral.

The New Jersey plates that were allegedly stolen from the LA dealer were 34 03 DTM, not 34 10 DTM. But when the police report was created and the plate was entered into Flock’s system, it was just recorded as 34 DTM. Just the five large characters, no little number in the middle. And Flock’s AI tech wasn’t registering that non-standard little number when it began picking up the Range Rover around town. It just saw ...