In the absence of enabling legislation one requires privacy principle to prevent the collection of such intimate personal details. Fingerprints cannot be collected by anyone except certain authorities as also DNA. In my view, biometrics are no different. As for drivers licences, they have been using photos for a long time , it’s just the use of biometrics which is worrying. They are using biometrics in an unregulated manners because one can’t prevent it unlike the taking of fingerprints or DNA. That doesn’t make it okay! The government is sleeping at the wheel re this issue. Pending a resolution there has to be an immediate national moratorium on the use of such cameras including by the police.
Just think of the lost revenue!
Having been a victim of the Optus Data Breach it’s the security of this very sensitive information that really concerns me. It’s frightening!
Every camera on the market today and expecially ones for security purposes, has facial detection as a standard setting. (not recognition, which is the matching of a face to a person, or even another facial image)
To do any kind of venue security, (of people gambling for instance, who are problem gamblers and need to be protected from themselves) Facial Recognition is a godsend.
Your smart phone has the ability to perform facial detection of every photo taken. Every photo you post on social media is public and can be harvested by anyone who wants it. People “tag” photos on social media, revealing possible identities.
There is simply no privacy once an image is published. There is no IP of your image either, you can try, but it’s not reasonable, therefore will not support a legal challenge. Please try though, it would be interesting to see how it turns out, depending on country too.
It takes less than 1s to scan a facial image against a library of 10 million facial images (from an Australian company website) and is dirt cheap to do, it’s just computation power.
I’m not pro or against facial recognition, but I try to be realist in accepting, that horse has bolted and trying to get it back now is unlikely. The capability is everywhere and the benefits overweigh the apparant privacy concerns. I understand the concerns for ID theft, but don’t see how that can maanifest from this process - maybe I’m wrong (?)
Bullying companies who are using it just makes them leery of sharing anything at all in future of what they are doing. Better to try to work with them, than to try to shut them down with legislation or threats of commerce.
I believe it is here to stay and we need to live with it. (I’m not in the industry, nor do I have a dog in the fight, I just think Choice could make better use of its resources than tilting at windmills)
Sure … let’s say a typical phone can be unlocked with a face id. So hacking a library of 10 million facial images has some benefit in getting access to a phone (or other device), which in turn causes further dominoes to fall.
For this reason, I would never use biometrics to unlock a phone or anything else, not a face, not a fingerprint, not a retina scan, not a voiceprint - since the more companies use these, the more that data will be public domain aka hacker domain.
Depends only on your government. EU? Yes, they can play hardball and they could achieve that. Australia? Nah, they only do what suits their agenda.
Unless they are forced by the law to reveal what they are doing.
That may depend on your privacy settings. What you post on social media should never be “public” unless you expressly intend for it to be public. However I understand that there are a lot of lamers.
For those who are not at least concerned about how facial recognition is going, and how accurate it is in the hands of humans, this.
3 Likes
