For once more , crimes are not only terrorist attacks (you still didn't answer if you think that boston marathon bombers would continue if they weren't identified ) . Rapes , burglaries , killings , traffic accidents and much much more have been solved due to camera surveillance , private or not .
And I'll point out again that the Boston marathon bombers were not identified due to mass surveillance, but due to private citizens.
If individuals or businesses want to use cameras on their private property, that is their right. The government does not have the right to record all people in all public places. And as I linked to above, the evidence shows that mass surveillance does not prevent any crimes.
For sure, these issues are getting worse and even more murky in regards to the government's cooptation of private systems and even people with private systems are getting the rug pulled from under them without even knowing that their data is getting used by governments without a warrant and it may well even be questionable if they have probable cause in some cases that they get access to private security cameras that are using third parties for their data storage.
It seems that in some cases, the courts (or maybe even the people need to rebel) need to rule that state action is involved when governments are purchasing and/or otherwise getting data from third parties without warrants or with shoddy procedures that allow them too much access to too much private information (cameras and other kinds of data being held by supposed third parties).