- Email: [email protected]
First universal privacy guidelines launched
NEWS telephonic voice recognition/verification reporting system” which will operate 24x7x365. ICE is also seeking a “biometric reporting system/ mobile platform or app for various forms of check-in, including facial recognition”. The agency explained: “This reporting system will capture and upload the co-ordinates and address of the participant at the time of check-in. In addition to biometric check-in, the mobile platform will allow participants to communicate with the contractor or enforcement and removal operations (ERO) officer, and the contractor or ERO can message the participant. The participant can request assistance, upload photos of documents, request communitybased services, confirm appointments, confirm and update contractor on court proceedings.” Currently, US border police arrest over 140,000 immigrants annually and the authorities have been struggling to detain those individuals awaiting hearings and deportation. When families are involved, ICE is also prevented from detaining parents and children together for more than 20 days. ICE is hoping the technology will enable it to monitor more than 20,000 more migrants and make “considerable cost savings” by enabling them to remain in the community while going through the legal process. • The Associated Press news agency has reported that ICE is to begin voluntary DNA biometric testing at the US-Mexico border, in cases where officials suspect that adults are fraudulently claiming to be parents of children as they cross into America. The aim is to prevent child trafficking. The DNA test will involve a cheek swab from both the adult and child, but the test material will be destroyed and will not be used as evidence in any criminal case, officials said. AP also says US border authorities have recently increased the level of biometric data they take from children aged 13 and younger, including fingerprints, raising some privacy concerns.
facial recognition
Giant pandas protected by face ID
A
facial recognition app that can tell one giant panda from another is being used by animal conservation experts in China. According to Xinhua News, the app has been developed by the China Conservation and Research Centre for Giant Pandas, working with researchers at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University and the Sichuan Normal University. The researchers have developed a database of around 120,000 images and 10,000 video clips of giant pandas. Using the database, the researchers apply automatic facial recognition
June 2019
EVENTS CALENDAR 10–12 July 2019
Financial Innovation and Payments Summit 2019
Do pandas all look the same? Not with facial recognition.
algorithms and AI technology to the panda faces. This enables them to identify individual pandas and better analyse the animals, in captivity and the wild. Close to 10,000 panda pictures have been analysed, marked and annotated. “The app and database will help us gather more precise and well-rounded data on the population, distribution, ages, gender ratio, birth and deaths of wild pandas, who live in deep mountains and are hard to track,” said Chen Peng, a researcher with the centre and co-author of a paper on ‘Giant Panda Face Recognition’. “It will definitely help us improve efficiency and effectiveness in conservation and management of the animals,” Chen said. According to Xinhua, China has carried out a number of scientific field research projects into giant pandas in the wild. They are one of the world’s most endangered species. There are just over 500 captive pandas worldwide, while fewer than 2,000 pandas live in the wild, mostly in the Chinese provinces of Sichuan and Shaanxi.
standards
First universal privacy guidelines launched
T
he Biometrics Institute has produced what it believes are the first universal privacy guidelines for biometric systems. The guidelines are designed to help organisations evaluate their current privacy practices, and to ensure organisations planning to introduce biometric systems ask the right questions. They consist of 16 principles, ranging from non-discrimination to maintaining a strong privacy environment. They also present a methodology for planning, implementing and managing biometric technology. The good-practice guidelines advise on the rights of citizens to have their biometric and record amended or deleted, how to manage data breaches, and how to deal with complaints from people who have suffered discrimination or damage as a result of biometric-related systems.
Newport, Rhode Island, USA This conference is aimed at executives in the payments sector, corporate end-users, financial and technology services organisations. Topics covered will include digital identity & authentication, the evolution of digital banking, financial innovation and the future of payments, artificial intelligence, data and predictive analytics, and streamlining e-commerce. More information: https://opalgroup.net/conference/financial-innovation-payments-summit-2019/
9–11 September 2019
Digital Identity Summit 2019
Los Angeles, USA This event explores best practices in the commercial application of digital identities, and the approaches needed to prevent cyber-criminals from gaining access to bank accounts and making fraudulent transactions, without increasing friction and false positives. The summit will feature speakers from leading e-commerce, financial services and payments organisations, giving attendees access to crowd-sourced, cross-industry shared intelligence about digital identities. It will also offer hands-on demonstrations and networking opportunities for business people looking to drive secure, profitable growth through digital channels. More information: https://www.digitalidentitysummit.com/
17 September 2019 IDM Europe
Van Der Valk Hotel, Utrecht, The Netherlands Billed as Europe’s leading identity and access management (IAM) conference, IDM is aimed at senior risk management, security and IAM professionals across government and large enterprise organisations. It will examine how businesses can protect their critical data assets and ensure regulatory compliance, while embracing disruptive technologies like AI and big data, IoT and blockchain. The conference will cover key trends in digital identity and strategies to create secure IAM infrastructures. Featured topics will include machine learning and IAM, understanding the evolving nature of trust and digital identity, encryption techniques, privileged account management, multi-factor authentication, self-service IAM and single sign-on (SSO) capabilities. Other areas covered include managing entitlements, credentials, privileges, duties and roles; federated access management; intelligent API security; and effective data management and security. More information: https://whitehallmedia.co.uk/idmeuropesep2019/
26–27 September 2019 Ecommerce Expo
Olympia, London, UK This two-day exhibition and conference is billed as Europe’s largest retail event. Over 15,000 retailers and marketing professionals are expected to attend, with over 250 exhibitors and 200-plus speakers. Ecommerce Expo is co-located with two other events, Technology for Marketing and ad:tech London, reflecting the convergence of e-commerce, advertising and marketing technology. The conference programme will focus on subjects including omni-channel and cross-border e-commerce, delivery and logistics, and personalisation. More information: https://www.ecommerceexpo.co.uk/
News continued on page 12...
Biometric Technology Today
3
NEWS/COMMENT ...News continued from page 3 They also cover how to protect the privacy of data collected on minors and people with disabilities, and the role of audits and privacy impact assessments. The Institute said: “We believe our 2019 guidelines are the first comprehensive, universal privacy guidelines for biometrics. They are the result of extensive monitoring and consultation by our Privacy and Policy Expert Group, which comprises a broad spectrum of privacy experts from around the globe. These guidelines are universal and applicable to you whether you are a supplier, researcher, operator, purchaser, manager or controller of biometric systems anywhere in the world.” The guidelines also cover the international implications for biometrics introduced by Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The guidelines are only available to Biometrics Institute members, at https://www. biometricsinstitute.org/privacyguidelines/.
law enforcement
Shareholders scorn Amazon Rekognition ban
A
mazon is to continue selling its controversial Rekognition facial recognition system to US police forces after its shareholders overwhelmingly rejected a move to ban it. A proposal at Amazon’s 22 May annual general meeting suggested: “Shareholders are concerned Rekognition poses a risk to civil and human rights and shareholder value, and that our company is enabling a surveillance system readily available to violate rights and target communities of colour.” But just 2.4% of the company’s shareholders backed the motion. Amazon defended the software in a statement saying: “In the two-plus years we have been offering Rekognition, we have not received a single report of it being used in the harmful manner posited in the proposal. But we are aware of many beneficial purposes of Rekognition, including by law enforcement to help improve public safety.” However, in the now familiar back-andforth over facial recognition, this support for Rekognition came just as US Republican and Democrat law makers in the US Congress united in agreeing that facial recognition technology generally needs to be curbed, according to reports by the BBC, Mashable, Press Herald and ZDNet. At a congressional House Oversight Committee hearing last month examining the civil rights impact of FR, Democrat congressman Jimmy Gomez cited the failed ban by Amazon shareholders and said: “My concerns only grow day by day. Shareholders did not 12
Biometric Technology Today
end up passing a ban of Rekognition. That just means it’s more important Congress acts.” Meanwhile, Republican congressman Jim Jordan said facial recognition needed to be regulated and suggested “a timeout” on law enforcement use of the technology. Committee chairman Elijah Cummings, a Democrat from Maryland, said there was “a lot of agreement” among lawmakers that the technology should be regulated and hoped Congress could “get something done in a bipartisan way”. Further hearings are scheduled. In its statement, Amazon acknowledged moves by politicians worldwide to regulate FR systems. It said: “To the extent there may be uncertainties in how existing laws should apply to FR technology, we will continue to offer our support to policy makers and legislators in identifying areas to develop guidance or legislation to clarify the proper application of those laws. We also support
the calls for an appropriate national legislative framework that protects individual civil rights and ensures that governments are transparent in their use of facial recognition technology.” • Meanwhile in the UK, office worker Ed Bridges has taken the South Wales Police to court, claiming that his privacy and data protection rights were violated when they used facial recognition technology to scan his face. Bridges is being supported by privacy campaign group Liberty. The police have defended their use of FR as it prevents crime and protects the public. This case continues, but elsewhere in the UK a man has been controversially fined £90 for “disorderly behaviour” after he tried to cover his face when approaching a police facial recognition camera on a street in London, reports the Mail Online. The police, who were trialling the technology, stopped the man, took his picture anyway and fined him.
COMMENT San Francisco has become the focal point of a debate about facial recognition going on in cities and countries worldwide: is it Big Brother surveillance or a valuable crime-fighting tool? Last month, San Francisco’s politicians made their choice. They voted to outright ban the use of FR systems by the city’s police force and local government agencies (see page 1). The councillors believe FR technology endangers civil liberties, and exacerbates racial injustice. So no ‘secret surveillance’ technology will be deployed in San Francisco until legally enforceable safeguards are in place. There were two predictable reactions to this: • The biometric tech industry, in the shape of the IBIA industry body, disagreed. The FR ban was based on a blanket assertion of potential harm, IBIA said, yet San Francisco’s councillors have “failed to present any factual evidence of harm”. • Civil rights campaigners agreed. Matt Cagle from ACLU (the American Civil Liberties Union) told the BBC: “With this vote, San Francisco has declared that face surveillance technology is incompatible with a healthy democracy and that residents deserve a voice in decisions about hightech surveillance. We applaud the city for listening to the community.” But there was a third, more nuanced response from within that community Matt Cagle referred to. A coalition of San Francisco residents’ groups called
Stop Crime SF said: “We agree there are problems with facial recognition ID technology and it should not be used today. But the technology will improve and could be a useful tool for public safety. We should keep the door open for that possibility.” Other commentators have likewise called for a ‘moratorium’ on the use of FR technology, rather than a full-stop ban. After all, the technology is getting better. But for many people, that is not enough. They believe cities and countries need a fully considered political, legal and ethical framework governing FR before it can be safely used in areas like law enforcement. Interestingly, the pantomime villain in this piece, Amazon – whose Rekognition software is the main focus of civil rights protests against FR – now publicly backs such efforts to properly regulate FR use. In a statement last month, Amazon said: “To the extent there may be uncertainties in how existing laws should apply to FR technology, we will continue to offer our support to policy makers and legislators in identifying areas to develop guidance or legislation. We also support the calls for an appropriate national legislative framework that protects individual civil rights and ensures that governments are transparent in their use of facial recognition technology.” This type of regulation, supported by the continued improvements in FR’s technical abilities, is surely the way forward. And the quicker legislators develop it, the better. Tim Ring
June 2019
facial recognition
Giant pandas protected by face ID
A
facial recognition app that can tell one giant panda from another is being used by animal conservation experts in China. According to Xinhua News, the app has been developed by the China Conservation and Research Centre for Giant Pandas, working with researchers at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University and the Sichuan Normal University. The researchers have developed a database of around 120,000 images and 10,000 video clips of giant pandas. Using the database, the researchers apply automatic facial recognition
June 2019
EVENTS CALENDAR 10–12 July 2019
Financial Innovation and Payments Summit 2019
Do pandas all look the same? Not with facial recognition.
algorithms and AI technology to the panda faces. This enables them to identify individual pandas and better analyse the animals, in captivity and the wild. Close to 10,000 panda pictures have been analysed, marked and annotated. “The app and database will help us gather more precise and well-rounded data on the population, distribution, ages, gender ratio, birth and deaths of wild pandas, who live in deep mountains and are hard to track,” said Chen Peng, a researcher with the centre and co-author of a paper on ‘Giant Panda Face Recognition’. “It will definitely help us improve efficiency and effectiveness in conservation and management of the animals,” Chen said. According to Xinhua, China has carried out a number of scientific field research projects into giant pandas in the wild. They are one of the world’s most endangered species. There are just over 500 captive pandas worldwide, while fewer than 2,000 pandas live in the wild, mostly in the Chinese provinces of Sichuan and Shaanxi.
standards
First universal privacy guidelines launched
T
he Biometrics Institute has produced what it believes are the first universal privacy guidelines for biometric systems. The guidelines are designed to help organisations evaluate their current privacy practices, and to ensure organisations planning to introduce biometric systems ask the right questions. They consist of 16 principles, ranging from non-discrimination to maintaining a strong privacy environment. They also present a methodology for planning, implementing and managing biometric technology. The good-practice guidelines advise on the rights of citizens to have their biometric and record amended or deleted, how to manage data breaches, and how to deal with complaints from people who have suffered discrimination or damage as a result of biometric-related systems.
Newport, Rhode Island, USA This conference is aimed at executives in the payments sector, corporate end-users, financial and technology services organisations. Topics covered will include digital identity & authentication, the evolution of digital banking, financial innovation and the future of payments, artificial intelligence, data and predictive analytics, and streamlining e-commerce. More information: https://opalgroup.net/conference/financial-innovation-payments-summit-2019/
9–11 September 2019
Digital Identity Summit 2019
Los Angeles, USA This event explores best practices in the commercial application of digital identities, and the approaches needed to prevent cyber-criminals from gaining access to bank accounts and making fraudulent transactions, without increasing friction and false positives. The summit will feature speakers from leading e-commerce, financial services and payments organisations, giving attendees access to crowd-sourced, cross-industry shared intelligence about digital identities. It will also offer hands-on demonstrations and networking opportunities for business people looking to drive secure, profitable growth through digital channels. More information: https://www.digitalidentitysummit.com/
17 September 2019 IDM Europe
Van Der Valk Hotel, Utrecht, The Netherlands Billed as Europe’s leading identity and access management (IAM) conference, IDM is aimed at senior risk management, security and IAM professionals across government and large enterprise organisations. It will examine how businesses can protect their critical data assets and ensure regulatory compliance, while embracing disruptive technologies like AI and big data, IoT and blockchain. The conference will cover key trends in digital identity and strategies to create secure IAM infrastructures. Featured topics will include machine learning and IAM, understanding the evolving nature of trust and digital identity, encryption techniques, privileged account management, multi-factor authentication, self-service IAM and single sign-on (SSO) capabilities. Other areas covered include managing entitlements, credentials, privileges, duties and roles; federated access management; intelligent API security; and effective data management and security. More information: https://whitehallmedia.co.uk/idmeuropesep2019/
26–27 September 2019 Ecommerce Expo
Olympia, London, UK This two-day exhibition and conference is billed as Europe’s largest retail event. Over 15,000 retailers and marketing professionals are expected to attend, with over 250 exhibitors and 200-plus speakers. Ecommerce Expo is co-located with two other events, Technology for Marketing and ad:tech London, reflecting the convergence of e-commerce, advertising and marketing technology. The conference programme will focus on subjects including omni-channel and cross-border e-commerce, delivery and logistics, and personalisation. More information: https://www.ecommerceexpo.co.uk/
News continued on page 12...
Biometric Technology Today
3
NEWS/COMMENT ...News continued from page 3 They also cover how to protect the privacy of data collected on minors and people with disabilities, and the role of audits and privacy impact assessments. The Institute said: “We believe our 2019 guidelines are the first comprehensive, universal privacy guidelines for biometrics. They are the result of extensive monitoring and consultation by our Privacy and Policy Expert Group, which comprises a broad spectrum of privacy experts from around the globe. These guidelines are universal and applicable to you whether you are a supplier, researcher, operator, purchaser, manager or controller of biometric systems anywhere in the world.” The guidelines also cover the international implications for biometrics introduced by Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The guidelines are only available to Biometrics Institute members, at https://www. biometricsinstitute.org/privacyguidelines/.
law enforcement
Shareholders scorn Amazon Rekognition ban
A
mazon is to continue selling its controversial Rekognition facial recognition system to US police forces after its shareholders overwhelmingly rejected a move to ban it. A proposal at Amazon’s 22 May annual general meeting suggested: “Shareholders are concerned Rekognition poses a risk to civil and human rights and shareholder value, and that our company is enabling a surveillance system readily available to violate rights and target communities of colour.” But just 2.4% of the company’s shareholders backed the motion. Amazon defended the software in a statement saying: “In the two-plus years we have been offering Rekognition, we have not received a single report of it being used in the harmful manner posited in the proposal. But we are aware of many beneficial purposes of Rekognition, including by law enforcement to help improve public safety.” However, in the now familiar back-andforth over facial recognition, this support for Rekognition came just as US Republican and Democrat law makers in the US Congress united in agreeing that facial recognition technology generally needs to be curbed, according to reports by the BBC, Mashable, Press Herald and ZDNet. At a congressional House Oversight Committee hearing last month examining the civil rights impact of FR, Democrat congressman Jimmy Gomez cited the failed ban by Amazon shareholders and said: “My concerns only grow day by day. Shareholders did not 12
Biometric Technology Today
end up passing a ban of Rekognition. That just means it’s more important Congress acts.” Meanwhile, Republican congressman Jim Jordan said facial recognition needed to be regulated and suggested “a timeout” on law enforcement use of the technology. Committee chairman Elijah Cummings, a Democrat from Maryland, said there was “a lot of agreement” among lawmakers that the technology should be regulated and hoped Congress could “get something done in a bipartisan way”. Further hearings are scheduled. In its statement, Amazon acknowledged moves by politicians worldwide to regulate FR systems. It said: “To the extent there may be uncertainties in how existing laws should apply to FR technology, we will continue to offer our support to policy makers and legislators in identifying areas to develop guidance or legislation to clarify the proper application of those laws. We also support
the calls for an appropriate national legislative framework that protects individual civil rights and ensures that governments are transparent in their use of facial recognition technology.” • Meanwhile in the UK, office worker Ed Bridges has taken the South Wales Police to court, claiming that his privacy and data protection rights were violated when they used facial recognition technology to scan his face. Bridges is being supported by privacy campaign group Liberty. The police have defended their use of FR as it prevents crime and protects the public. This case continues, but elsewhere in the UK a man has been controversially fined £90 for “disorderly behaviour” after he tried to cover his face when approaching a police facial recognition camera on a street in London, reports the Mail Online. The police, who were trialling the technology, stopped the man, took his picture anyway and fined him.
COMMENT San Francisco has become the focal point of a debate about facial recognition going on in cities and countries worldwide: is it Big Brother surveillance or a valuable crime-fighting tool? Last month, San Francisco’s politicians made their choice. They voted to outright ban the use of FR systems by the city’s police force and local government agencies (see page 1). The councillors believe FR technology endangers civil liberties, and exacerbates racial injustice. So no ‘secret surveillance’ technology will be deployed in San Francisco until legally enforceable safeguards are in place. There were two predictable reactions to this: • The biometric tech industry, in the shape of the IBIA industry body, disagreed. The FR ban was based on a blanket assertion of potential harm, IBIA said, yet San Francisco’s councillors have “failed to present any factual evidence of harm”. • Civil rights campaigners agreed. Matt Cagle from ACLU (the American Civil Liberties Union) told the BBC: “With this vote, San Francisco has declared that face surveillance technology is incompatible with a healthy democracy and that residents deserve a voice in decisions about hightech surveillance. We applaud the city for listening to the community.” But there was a third, more nuanced response from within that community Matt Cagle referred to. A coalition of San Francisco residents’ groups called
Stop Crime SF said: “We agree there are problems with facial recognition ID technology and it should not be used today. But the technology will improve and could be a useful tool for public safety. We should keep the door open for that possibility.” Other commentators have likewise called for a ‘moratorium’ on the use of FR technology, rather than a full-stop ban. After all, the technology is getting better. But for many people, that is not enough. They believe cities and countries need a fully considered political, legal and ethical framework governing FR before it can be safely used in areas like law enforcement. Interestingly, the pantomime villain in this piece, Amazon – whose Rekognition software is the main focus of civil rights protests against FR – now publicly backs such efforts to properly regulate FR use. In a statement last month, Amazon said: “To the extent there may be uncertainties in how existing laws should apply to FR technology, we will continue to offer our support to policy makers and legislators in identifying areas to develop guidance or legislation. We also support the calls for an appropriate national legislative framework that protects individual civil rights and ensures that governments are transparent in their use of facial recognition technology.” This type of regulation, supported by the continued improvements in FR’s technical abilities, is surely the way forward. And the quicker legislators develop it, the better. Tim Ring
June 2019