FB pixel

AI Act could inform biometrics standards for European identity regulation

Research paper explores potential influence and enforcement
AI Act could inform biometrics standards for European identity regulation
 

The European Union’s AI Act may not achieve the “Brussels effect” – incentivizing non-EU countries to accept changes in AI products and regulations. The legislation could, however, influence future standards and safeguards for biometric and identification tools within the bloc itself, including for initiatives such as the EU Digital Identity (EUDI) Wallet.

This means that the question of whether the AI Act protects fundamental rights is even more important, according to a new research paper analyzing the legislation’s internal influence within the EU.

“The AI Act is expected to establish a protective standard for biometrics and identification tools, reflecting the EU’s commitment to proportionally balancing innovation with regulation, exemplified in the Digital Identity Wallet,” the paper notes. “However, the EU appears to overlook the risks related to enforcing the rule.”

The paper titled From Global Standards to Local Safeguards: The AI Act, Biometrics, and Fundamental Rights also looks into how AI Act principles should guide other projects using biometric data and analyzes the European standards for regulating biometric identification systems. Authored by Federica Paolucci, Ph.D. Candidate at the Bocconi University, in Milan the paper is forthcoming in Springer by the end of 2024.

Although the AI rulebook seeks to establish a product safety standard, it leaves balancing security and rights protections to EU member states, according to the researcher.  This is why it is important to monitor how individual states will enact the legislation.

One particular issue is the use of real-time and retrospective facial recognition. Although the AI Act bans biometric surveillance in public spaces, it leaves exceptions for law enforcement in specific circumstances.

“While acknowledging the AI Act’s achievements, such as the inclusion of the Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment framework and procedural rights exercise, concerns persist regarding inconsistencies in biometric surveillance and potential inefficiencies in fundamental rights protection mechanisms,” the paper notes.

Related Posts

Article Topics

 |   |   |   |   |   | 

Latest Biometrics News

 

Ring and Flock call off integration as scrutiny of camera-to-police partnership intensifies

Amazon-owned Ring and Flock Safety have canceled their planned partnership, stepping back from an integration that would have linked one…

 

MOSIP pursues democratization of digital identity with unconference conversations

A democratic vision of digital identity is central to the non-profit, open-source mandate of MOSIP. As the organization and the…

 

Liveness is king: FaceTec’s Jay Meier in conversation with Chris Burt 

It’s best, says Jay Meier, to think about identity management as a system of symbiotic systems. Which is to say,…

 

Ofcom fines Kick, threatens 4chan as OSA enforcement steadily dials up

UK regulator Ofcom has faced criticism for being too slow and lenient with its power to enforce the Online Safety…

 

Innovatrics, ROC improve rankings in NIST ELFT, rising to 2 and 3 respectively

Innovatrics is celebrating success in the latest National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Evaluation of Latent Fingerprint Technologies (ELFT)…

 

Meta plans launch of facial recognition to smart glasses in ‘dynamic political environment’

Meta is reportedly planning to roll out facial recognition capabilities for its smart glasses as early as this year, taking…

Comments

Leave a Reply

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

Biometric Market Analysis and Buyer's Guides

Most Viewed This Week

Featured Company

Biometrics Insight, Opinion

Digital ID In-Depth

Biometrics White Papers

Biometrics Events