第769回　入札監理小委員会（開催案内）

令和8年8月27日からの大雨に伴う災害に係る普通交付税（11月定例交付分）の繰上げ交付

情報通信行政・郵政行政審議会　郵政行政分科会（第105回）

情報通信審議会　情報通信技術分科会（第198回）配付資料・議事概要・議事録

デジタル空間における情報流通の諸課題への対処に関する検討会（第14回）配付資料

令和8年度地方財政審議会（8月21日）議事要旨

令和8年度地方財政審議会（8月21日）議事要旨

令和8年度地方財政審議会（8月28日）議事要旨

情報通信審議会 情報通信政策部会 放送政策委員会 主査ヒアリング（株式会社TBSテレビ ）

情報通信審議会　情報通信技術分科会　ITU 部会　放送業務委員会（第62回）配布資料

情報通信審議会 情報通信政策部会 放送政策委員会 主査ヒアリング（株式会社テレビ朝日 ）

Within the last few days, two important state actions have dealt a big blow to automated license plate reader (ALPR) networks. This is just the latest proof of the growing tide of public opposition to mass surveillance. After years of successful grassroots battles to pull these cameras from local streets, bipartisan momentum is sweeping the country.

On August 28, Texas Governor Greg Abbott banned state agencies from spending public funds on Flock cameras. The order dropped just as The Texas Tribune prepared to publish an investigation revealing that a state agency had quietly funneled at least $30 million into building a sprawling surveillance network. 

Then on August 31, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) issued a memo, announced by Governor Ron DeSantis, ordering the removal of all ALPRs from the right-of-way on state highways within 30 days. The order revokes all previously approved permits to install ALPRs, and bars transportation officials from issuing future permits. 

FDOT officials stated that “the recent exponential increase in deployments along our roadways, coupled with concerning reports of misuse, data privacy concerns, and surveillance schemes merit immediate action to preserve Floridians’ sovereignty and quality of life.” FDOT’s action has been followed by a surge of local governments in Florida canceling or pausing their vendor contracts.

Much more work remains. Many ALPRs in Florida are not on state highways, but sit on city streets, county roads, residential driveways, and shopping center parking lots—and FDOT's order doesn't touch any of them. Likewise, the Texas directive leaves local agencies free to use city, county, federal, and private funds to install cameras.

This week’s good news follows years of pushback from local advocates that has seen dozens of cities sever ties with surveillance companies. According to some metrics, during the last 30 days, an average of three localities per day has halted contracts with Flock. Other advocates have been resisting ALPRs in statehouses and court houses, and by blowing the whistle with investigative activism.

The moves in Florida and Texas also illustrate the power that the executive branch can wield to curtail mass surveillance with almost immediate results. We hope that the California Governor Gavin Newsom and the California Department of Transportation will take notice and initiate steps to curb this technology, starting with removing the ALPRs that U.S. Border Patrol and the Drug Enforcement Administration have installed on California highways.

EFF’s position remains: ALPR mass surveillance – the indiscriminate, continuous collection and retention of location data on every driver, regardless of suspicion – should not exist. This past week’s actions in Texas and Florida are good steps forward, but we are still far from the finish line. We will continue working alongside community groups to keep cameras off local streets, while urging judges and state lawmakers to impose enforceable restraints on this warrantless mass surveillance.

　今年５月、高市政権による「スパイ防止関連法制」の第一弾、国家情報会議設置法が成立し、７月には首相と主要閣僚から成る国家情報会議とその事務局の国家情報局（内閣情報調査室を格上げ）が設置された。　政府は「戦略的に情報を収集・集約・分析する能力を向上」させる「司令塔機能の強化」だと説く（内閣官房ＨＰ）。しかし背後には、各省庁と公安警察・公安調査庁・防衛省情報本部・自衛隊情報保全隊などの情報・諜報機関（インテリジェンス機関）が収集した情報を、国家情報局が集約することで、各機関の間で..

株式会社キーエンスが提供するXG VisionTerminalおよびXG-X VisionTerminalには、におけるXML外部エンティティ参照（XXE）の不適切な制限の脆弱性が存在します。

株式会社Shizen Connectが提供するShizenBox2には、複数の脆弱性が存在します。

CERT/CCから本件に関するアドバイザリが公表されました。

A federal judge has sided with Anthropic on its claims that the Department of Defense illegally retaliated against Anthropic’s protected speech by labeling the AI company a “supply chain risk.” The judge found that designation, intended to penalize Anthropic for telling the U.S. military it would not allow their technology to be used for mass surveillance of U.S. persons, “constituted unlawful retaliation in violation of the First Amendment.” EFF joined a coalition of organizations in filing multiple amicus briefs (here, here) arguing that the Pentagon had trampled on Anthropics First Amendment rights. We agree with the court’s decision and applaud the judge for slapping down such an obvious act of illegal and unconstitutional retribution by the Pentagon—even as the court left open the broader question of whether a company’s choices about how its technology may be used are protected speech in their own right. 

From the start of this conflict, EFF argued that companies should not be penalized for not wanting to conduct mass surveillance of US persons. Nor do we want to live in a legal system where our susceptibility to surveillance is hashed out and decided in closed-door contract negotiations between a few powerful people at the military and an AI company. Unfortunately, this ruling does little to address the bigger problem: that Congress has abdicated its responsibility to adopt statutory safeguards to protect our privacy, and instead left us reliant on the whims of private companies to decide when they are and are not willing to help the government conduct mass surveillance. 

In February 2026, the government began threatening to penalize Anthropic unless it backed off its position that it did not want the U.S. military using its AI product Claude for mass surveillance of Americans or to power autonomous weapons systems. Ultimately, the Department of Defense, deciding that it did not want military contractors dictating what its products could or could not be used for, declared the company a “supply chain risk.” This national security designation means the government and companies that do business with it cannot use the company’s products for government projects. It was, in essence, an attempted blacklisting of Anthropic for setting boundaries and articulating unacceptable use cases for its products. 

None of this is to say that Anthropic is a morally unimpeachable company, or that it and other companies would never permit their products to be used under specific conditions to aid in surveillance or analysis of collected data that could affect U.S. persons—but the facts remain: the government cannot punish a company for having preferences regarding unconstitutional uses of its technology. 

Unsupported claims that a company poses a national security risk should never be an excuse for government retaliation. This ruling correctly recognizes the dangerous implications of allowing the government to punish a company for its critical speech and for refusing to allow its technology to be used for mass surveillance. While we applaud the court's decision, we continue to urge lawmakers to take the protection of our privacy seriously. We shouldn't have to rely on private companies to protect us from the surveillance state. It's past time for Congress to act.

警察庁は、「令和8年版 警察白書」を公開しました。本文書では、「深刻化するサイバー空間の脅威と警察の新たなる展開」を特集し、重大サイバー事案への対処や今後の警察の取り組みなどについて紹介しています。