International Security Journal - August 2019 - Special Report

editor’s introduction Special Report
editor’s introduction
MATTHEW BULL @INTSECJOURNAL @INTSECJOURNAL2019 INTERNATIONAL SECURITY JOURNAL
surveillance
With the surveillance industry at a crossroads, International Security
Journal takes a deeper look at which direction it is likely to take
In this month’s Special Report, we
are taking a deeper look into the
critical subject of surveillance.
For some time now, the global
surveillance market has been
growing at an incredible rate, but
it now finds itself at somewhat of a
crossroads. The introduction of new
technologies and fears over privacy
have led to manufacturers needing
to take a step back and consider
what their next moves will be.
The use of facial recognition within
surveillance systems was again
brought to the fore when the city
of San Francisco banned its use
in May 2019. UK authorities are
now also raising concerns about
the technology with the House of
Commons Science and Technology
Committee suggesting that use
of automatic facial recognition
should be suspended.
The committee stated that no further
trials of the technology should take
place until relevant regulations are
introduced, it raised concerns over
accuracy and bias and warned
that police forces were failing
to edit a database of custody
images to remove pictures of
unconvicted individuals.
Many leading figures throughout the
industry advocate the introduction
of a stringent legal framework to
control the use of the technology.
Tony Porter, Surveillance Camera
Commissioner believes that the
responsibility for finding such a
solution lies with lawmakers. In his
annual report, produced for the UK
parliament in January 2019, Porter
projected that “the police use of
integrated and highly sophisticated
video surveillance platforms will
continue to increase” meaning
that the balance between privacy
and security will continue to
challenge law enforcement.
Porter continued: “Lawmakers and
regulators need to be robust and coordinated
in supporting those efforts
and challenging them when their use
is deemed excessive.”
So what does all this uncertainty
mean for manufacturers? Axon, the
company that supplies 47 out of the
69 largest police agencies in the
United States with body cameras
and software, has announced that it
will ban the use of facial recognition
systems on its devices.
“Face recognition technology is not
currently reliable enough to ethically
justify its use,” the company’s
independent ethics board concluded.
In a 28-page report, Axon’s ethics
board, which was handpicked by
members of the Policing Project at
New York University School of Law,
argued that the technology “does not
perform as well on people of colour
compared to whites, or young people
compared to older people.”
It is, of course, an extreme
step to take but one that many
manufacturers could soon be
considering. Legal challenges
against facial recognition are
springing up around the world
and this moratorium from Axon
could lead the way towards more
responsible use of the technology.
For those vendors that continue to
develop facial recognition, it appears
that privacy masking software is an
absolute necessity, especially within
the EU in order to comply with
GDPR. Companies such as IDIS and
Hanwha Techwin are leaders in this
particular field with more accurate
and easier-to-use solutions being
released all the time.
This Special Report will help
the industry to navigate the
unknown terrain that lies ahead.
InternationalSecurityJournal.com ISJ | 41