The UK’s chief information safety regulator has warned over reckless and inappropriate use of stay facial recognition (LFR) in public locations.
Publishing an opinion right now on using this biometric surveillance in public — to set out what’s dubbed because the “rules of engagement” — the data commissioner, Elizabeth Denham, additionally famous that a lot of investigations already undertaken by her workplace into deliberate purposes of the tech have discovered issues in all circumstances.
“I am deeply concerned about the potential for live facial recognition (LFR) technology to be used inappropriately, excessively or even recklessly. When sensitive personal data is collected on a mass scale without people’s knowledge, choice or control, the impacts could be significant,” she warned in a weblog submit.
“Uses we’ve seen included addressing public security considerations and creating biometric profiles to focus on folks with personalised promoting.
“It is telling that none of the organisations involved in our completed investigations were able to fully justify the processing and, of those systems that went live, none were fully compliant with the requirements of data protection law. All of the organisations chose to stop, or not proceed with, the use of LFR.”
“Unlike CCTV, LFR and its algorithms can automatically identify who you are and infer sensitive details about you. It can be used to instantly profile you to serve up personalised adverts or match your image against known shoplifters as you do your weekly grocery shop,” Denham added.
“In future, there’s the potential to overlay CCTV cameras with LFR, and even to combine it with social media data or other ‘big data’ systems — LFR is supercharged CCTV.”
The use of biometric applied sciences to determine people remotely sparks main human rights considerations, together with round privateness and the chance of discrimination.
Across Europe there are campaigns — reminiscent of Reclaim your Face — calling for a ban on biometric mass surveillance.
In one other focused motion, again in May, Privacy International and others filed authorized challenges on the controversial US facial recognition firm, Clearview AI, searching for to cease it from working in Europe altogether. (Some regional police forces have been tapping in — together with in Sweden the place the power was fined by the nationwide DPA earlier this yr for illegal use of the tech.)
But whereas there’s main public opposition to biometric surveillance in Europe, the area’s lawmakers have up to now — at finest — been fiddling across the edges of the controversial concern.
A pan-EU regulation the European Commission introduced in April, which proposes a risk-based framework for purposes of synthetic intelligence, included solely a partial prohibition on legislation enforcement’s use of biometric surveillance in public locations — with vast ranging exemptions which have drawn loads of criticism.
There have additionally been requires a complete ban on using applied sciences like stay facial recognition in public from MEPs throughout the political spectrum. The EU’s chief information safety supervisor has additionally urged lawmakers to at the very least briefly ban using biometric surveillance in public.
The EU’s deliberate AI Regulation received’t apply within the UK, in any case, because the nation is now outdoors the bloc. And it stays to be seen whether or not the UK authorities will search to weaken the nationwide information safety regime.
A latest report it commissioned to look at how the UK might revise its regulatory regime, post-Brexit, has — for instance — urged changing the UK GDPR with a brand new “UK framework” — proposing adjustments to “free up data for innovation and in the public interest”, because it places it, and advocating for revisions for AI and “growth sectors”. So whether or not the UK’s information safety regime shall be put to the torch in a post-Brexit bonfire of ‘red tape’ is a key concern for rights watchers.
(The Taskforce on Innovation, Growth and…
