FB pixel

Facial recognition guidelines are good. A new UK guide is not, say privacy advocates

 

An influential police association in the United Kingdom has published voluntary guidelines for using live facial recognition — something privacy advocates globally have demanded. But it is not the guidance some of them were hoping for.

After seeking public comment on the guide a year ago, the College of Policing posted the report this week. It is a detailed examination of the technology and practices involved in tracking live face biometrics, one of the most contentious applications of the AI algorithms.

Proposed guidelines are not hard to come by, however most tend to be very specific or too conceptual.

The ability for a government agency (or almost any other organization) to turn on a camera pointed at foot traffic and begin sifting through the faces disturbs not only liberal-leaning privacy advocates but also conservative-leaning small-government activists.

Much of the guide focuses on fine points, such as the process agencies should follow for the stand-alone deployment of live facial recognition systems and operations, and how to document each aspect of a deployment.

But of particular note in the guide, which pertains specifically to police agencies in England and Wales, is the spectrum of people in public who can be placed on a watch list, included in the system to identify certain people on sight.

Some categories of people are obvious — anyone wanted by a judge or suspected of a crime. But an authorizing officer, under the guidelines, could add the face biometrics of a person deemed at risk of hurting themselves.

Trickier still, the “victim of an offence or a person who the police have reasonable grounds to suspect would have information of importance and relevance to progress an investigation.” A “close associate” of someone added to a watch list can be considered for inclusion, too, according to the association.

The makeup of the watchlist, the need for a data protection impact assessment and bias protections, and policy guidance for each element were identified as shortcomings when a previous live facial recognition deployment by South Wales Police was declared unlawful.

The guideline calls for authorizing officers to show that inclusion is proportional to the need: How deep is a person’s stated need for privacy? How important of a suspect is the person sought? Are there better, less intrusive avenues in searching for a suspect?

The association also recommends that authorizing officers to consider the expectation of privacy a member of the public might have where a camera is in use. The expectations would not automatically rule out deployment, even at demonstrations, churches, polling places and hospitals, but could result in a change of tactics.

It all sounds like loopholes to at least some privacy advocates.

An article in WalesOnline, some activists quoted said that the guidelines already document mission creep compared to earlier operations and trial balloons. Nor do the recommendations tackle concern that facial recognition is a solution in search of a problem, or that the technology has not made communities safer, they told the publication.

Article Topics

 |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   | 

Latest Biometrics News

 

Municipal ID programs offer ID to undocumented people, and ICE wants their data

Amid the ongoing collapse of democratic norms in the U.S., it is easy to miss a nightmare scenario unfolding for…

 

Unissey levels-up biometric injection attack detection certification

Unissey’s face biometrics have been certified to substantial-level compliance with the European biometric injection attack detection (IAD) standard. Injection attacks…

 

Hey babe, check out my regulations: porn star, VerifyMy spice up UK Online Safety Act

It’s one thing when Christian moralists lobby for age assurance laws – but another thing entirely when the voices are…

 

Regula launches dedicated biometric morph attack detector

A new face morphing detector has been unveiled by Regula to defend against the significant security threat of passports and…

 

UK regulator fines 23andMe over massive genetic data breach

The U.K. Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has fined U.S.-based 23andMe £2.31 million for serious security failures that resulted in a…

 

Tonga reveals MOSIP and VS One World foundations of DPI success

Tonga launched its TongaPass digital ID and digital government portal this month. The government is now ramping up registration as…

Comments

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Biometric Market Analysis

Most Viewed This Week

Featured Company

Biometrics Insight, Opinion

Digital ID In-Depth

Biometrics White Papers

Biometrics Events