DNA profiling is frequently described as the gold standard for individual identification and thus an important tool for crime prevention, detection and deterrence. While the scholarly discourses tend to privilege a focus on the oppressive elements of DNA profiling and surveillance, the political and public discourses usually highlight the benefits of forensic DNA technologies to fight and prevent crime. Most arguments are based on abstract concepts with little empirical evidence to support their respective assumptions. In this paper we argue that there is a call for an insight about how surveillance works in concrete terms for a diversity of social actors: for those who are surveilled (i.e. convicted individuals), for surveillants (i.e. agents who are responsible for the regulation and daily management of forensic DNA databases) and for academics involved in crime studies. This situated perspective contributes to a more nuanced debate about the benefits, risks, uncertainties and effects of the use of DNA databasing for surveillance purposes and crime control.