France Declares School Facial Recognition Illegal Due to GDPR

By Charles Rollet, Published Oct 31, 2019, 07:23am EDT

France is the latest European country to effectively prohibit facial recognition as a school access control solution, even with the consent of students, after Sweden did so in August.

The decision represents another blow to the companies marketing such solutions. In this post, we examine the news and its broader meaning, including:

  • Background
  • Solution Description
  • Feedback from Cisco, the provider of the solution
  • CNIL Response: Not GDPR Compliant
  • Sweden Comparison
  • What the GDPR Says
  • Immediate Impact
  • Privacy Activist Pledge
  • Local Response

**********

** ****, ****** ******** authorities ********* * **** Protection ****** ********** ** France's **** ********** ******, the****, ********** ******** *** a ****** *********** ****** control ******** ** *** high ******* (*** ** Nice *** *** ***** in **********.)

Solution ***********

*** ******** *** ********* by *****'* ****** ****** and ******** ****** ****** ******** ********* ***** ******, **** the ****** ******** ******** to *** ********* *********** on ***** *****:

**** *********** ***** ****** about **** ******* ***** to *** ****'* ********, and **** **** ** the ********* *******:

  • ***** ***** **** ******* face *** ******** *** its***** ********** *****, *** ****** *********** software **** **** *** open ******, ************ *******'* *++ ****** *********** library.
  • ***** **** ****, "*** final ******* **** ** totally ******** ** *****" and ******** *** **** as **** ** ** "experiment" ** ******* * new "************" ****** ******* system *** *******.
  • ***** ******* ******* *** gates, ****** ***** **** under ***** ******* ********** (red-banned, ******-*******, *****-**********) *** be ******* ** ******* throughout *** ********.
  • ******** *** ******* **** their ******* ***** ** being ******* **** *** system.

CNIL ********: *** **** *********

** *******, *** ********** * ***** *********:

***** * ******** *********** of **** *******, *** CNIL ********* **** ** is ******** ** *** main ********** ** *************** and **** ************ ****** in *** ****

*** ******** *** *********** objectives *** ** ******** by ******* **** *** far **** ********* ** terms ** ******** **** and ********** *******, *** example * ***** *******

********* *********** *** ** a******* ********, ********* ********** ******** [data] **********

**** * ****** **** cannot ** ******* *** in *****

*** **** **** **** this *** ********** ******** for ********, ********** ****** recognition ** "************ *********":

****** *********** ******* *** particularly ********* *** ******* major ***** ** ******** data *** ********** *******, particularly **** ******* ** minors

Sweden **********

*** ******* *** *** a ******* *********** ** France,******* ****:

********** ****** *** ** done ** ***** **** that *** ******* ******* violation *** ********.

*******, ****** *** ****, the ******* *** **** found **** *** ******'* consent ***** *** ********** was *******, ** ******* could *** ** "****** given" (************ *** ****) *** to *** ******* ******* of ***** ******* ******** and ********. *** **** made ** ******* ** consent ** *** *********.

What *** **** ****

*** **** **** *** address ****** *********** ********** and ****************** ********** ** ******* is ********. *******, ******* **** *************** **** ******** **** collection ** ********* *** proportional:

********, ******** *** ******* to **** ** ********* in ******** ** *** purposes *** ***** **** are *********

********* *** *********, ******** and ********** ******** *** not ******* ********* ** a ****** **** ** incompatible **** ***** ********

Non-Binding *** *** ********

***********, *** ****'* ******** is ***-******* *** **** not ********** * ******* ban ** *** ****** schools ********** ****** *********** systems, ** *** ******* ********** ***** *********** *** authorize *** ******* ********** projects ******* *** ***** approval. **** ***** ******'********* *********** ***** ********** *** project.

*******, *** **** ***** has *** ********* ** sanction ******* ********** **** any ********** ********** ******* brought ** *** ********* once ************ ******.

Privacy ******** *******

*** ****'* ******** **** has * ***** ******** effect, **** ******* ******** group ** ********** ** Net********** ***** **** ******** to ****'* ********* "*** time * ****** ** administration ******* ** ******* the *** *****".

Local ********

*** ********* ** ******'* southern ******,****** ********, ******* "* ****** regret **** *** **** placed *** ******** ** our ******** ***** *** dusty ********", ****** **** he ***** **** * new *********** "**** ****".

** ********** ** *** hailed *** ********** * "*******", *********** "the ******** ******* *****" for "********* **** *** law-and-order ******** ** *** elected *********". (***** ****** told **** ** *** doing **** ******* *** free).

**********

**** ** ******* **** to *** ********* **** promote ****** *********** *** educational ************, **** ** SAFR.

** ****** *********** ********** spreads, **** ******** ********* will ** ******* ***** own *************** ** ******* this ********** *** **** is **** *********; ** far, *** ****** ** clear.

Comments (1)

**** ** **** * think, * ***''* ***** we **** ** ** putting ****** *********** ** children. *** **** ** kids *** ****** ** numbers.

Read this IPVM report for free.

This article is part of IPVM's 6,743 reports, 909 tests and is only available to members. To get a one-time preview of our work, enter your work email to access the full article.

Already a member? Login here | Join now
Loading Related Reports