Main menu

Pages

Face Recognition Technology Down – OpEd – Eurasian Review

featured image

The language is by no means reassuring. Many of Australia’s largest retailers gently guarantee that they will “pause” their use, even though they have become unmanageable using facial recognition technology unknown to their customers. Pranks show resentment only in the most qualified way.

It’s all found by department store chain Kmart and home warehouse chain Bunnings to use FRT to reduce theft in some stores while seemingly protecting customers and staff, according to a CHOICE study. It started from. The group also found that the third retailer, The Good Guys, did not follow its clearly self-righteous name, using technology to store the customer’s unique biometric information.

The survey asked 25 of Australia’s leading companies if they use FRT and how their privacy policies stack up. Based on the findings, three major causes have been identified.

FRT navigates fairly dangerous terrain. There is a broader issue of privacy and consent issues. Kate Bower, a proponent of consumer data at CHOICE, touched on the issue, pointing out that such companies’ privacy policies are usually buried in the vast online undergrowth and are “not easy to find.” I did. Given the nature of the operation of such stores (direct and retail), it was unlikely that anyone would have “read the privacy policy” before entering.

At some stores, Kmart and Bunnings put up sports signs at the entrance to let customers know that such technology was being used. There are also general issues regarding stigma and racism. The obvious concern here was that the sign itself was barely noticeable to patrons and was placed in a strategically harmless location. For students struggling to understand the incorporation of contract law and terms and conditions, such signs are virtually worthless in drawing attention to individuals entering the store.

In a survey of more than 1,000 Australians from March to April this year, CHOICE found a general lack of awareness of the nature of the technology used. Three in four (76%) claimed that they were not blissful ignorance that they did not know that retailers were using facial recognition. Those who sniffed the mice identified the wrong parties: the supermarket chains Coles and Woolworths.

While 83% of respondents insisted that retailers should disclose their use of FRT to their customers before entering the store, 78% expressed concern about the security of faceprint data protected by businesses. did.

Bunnings, of course, accused CHOICE of misrepresenting their case. In the carefully selected words of Chief Operating Officer Simon McDowell, such “technology is only used to keep teams and customers safe and prevent illegal activity in stores. Privacy law.. ”

Throughout the history of history, violating the law and violating the principles will saddle the principles of necessity and get involved in the debate. In this case, the staff who may be at risk from reprimands (“repeated abuse and threatening behavior”, McDowell calls it), or customers who need protection when shopping for them. And even when used, there is strict control over the use of technology that is only accessible by. [a] A specially trained team. “

Mike Schneider, Managing Director of Bunnings Warehouse, reiterates the security elements of the enterprise. FRT helped identify banned and unwanted customers. “We don’t use it for marketing or tracking customer behavior, nor do we use it to identify patrons entering our stores, as CHOICE suggests.”

On July 12, the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) ​​office announced that it would begin investigating how Kmart and Bunnings process personal information, especially in relation to the use of FRT. Andrew Stokes, director of strategic communications for the organization, said that the biometric information collected by the FRT was ” Privacy law.. “

Organization corresponding to the operation of Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) does not have the right to collect confidential information without the consent of the individual. The information collected should also be reasonably necessary for the functioning or activity of the organization.

Consent and law are not always the best terms. In many cases, strangers can converge or miss each other altogether. With respect to Australian privacy law, it’s almost unimpressive and often disappointing that it’s not bitten, so OAIC has made the following factors to determine if true consent has been given to the use of FRT: Be careful. Whether it was done voluntarily. Whether it was up-to-date and concrete. And whether the individual had the ability to understand and communicate that consent.

Responses from the three retailers are almost always tactical and likely awaiting an OAIC verdict. According to Bower, “Customers welcome the news that Bunnings and Kmart have joined The Good Guys to suspend the use of facial recognition technology in stores, but what customers really want is completely. It’s to stop using it. “Doing so would be very contrary to the nasty nature of the Australian corporate culture, which is a private ship, similar to that found on this warming planet. They may be hurt and a little embarrassing, but unlikely to be compliant.