Indeed, if you start with the contact tracing platform, add a mass surveillance system to it, you end up with a mass surveillance system. Note that a surveillance system like the one you propose doesn’t need the contact tracing platform to work.

But it does make it a heck of a lot cheaper to build and scale. You need far fewer cameras and can spread cheap bluetooth beacons densely across the area. And you can put beacons in places you can't use cameras.

Wait, so how are you matching the beacons (cryptographic random values) back to individual users?The back end only gets that information if a user tests positive and agrees to submit the data.

Even then there is no reason to store that linkage so server compromises won't leak this information.

You do realize that the scanning of bluetooth is already in place? For example http://www.libelium.com/products/meshlium/smartphone-detecti... or https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/04/tech/location-tracking-florid...

The contact tracking system does not add anything that is not present for tracking individuals. What it does provide is for two anonymous individuals to determine if they were in contact with each other for some period of time in the past.

The ability to do surveillance to see if an individual is in a particular place at a particular time is neither aided nor hindered by the contract tracing framework that Apple and Google provided.

You’d have to have a pretty sophisticated setup to do so, considering the identifiers are randomly changing all the time. It would be far easier to use the existing identifying cell tower data that already exists. Your paranoia isn’t justified IMHO.