Genetec Privacy Protector Tested

By Rob Kilpatrick, Published Nov 12, 2018, 10:33am EST

Genetec has built Kiwi Security's Privacy Protector into Security Center, an analytic which anonymizes individuals in cameras' fields of view without obscuring actions and movements.

We tested Privacy Protector in multiple scenarios to see how it performs, examining:

  • Does Privacy Protector consistently mask subjects?
  • Does it mask fast moving subjects?
  • Does it mast multiple subjects in the scene?
  • How does it perform in low light?
  • What settings impact available subject details?
  • How do pixelate, blur, and colorize modes differ in performance?
  • How does Privacy Protector impact server load?

genetec privacy protector-free images

*******

** *** *****, ******* Protector ****** **** ** most ******, ******** ******* subjects, ********* ***** ******* as **** ** ******** people ** *** ***** of ****. ************, ************* was ******, **** ******* settings (********, **% *********) working **** ** **** scenes.

*******, ***** *** *** key ****** ** ** aware ** **** ******** to *** ******* *********:

  • ********* ******** ******** ** low *****:** *** ***** ****** (~1 *** *** *****), the ******** ************ ****** to **** *** ****** subject, ********* ***** ****. However, ******* ** **** light ***** *** **** due ** ****** ****** of ******* *****/***********.
  • *********** *** ******:** *** *****, ******** Privacy ********* ******** ** a *-*% ******** ** CPU **** *** ****** (1080p/10FPS) *** ** * second ****** ***** ******* (to ***** ********* ** recorded *****) ** **** as ******** **********. ** very ***** ******* **** impact *** ** **********, but ** **** **-** camera *******, ***** *** need ** ******* ******* Protector ** * ********* server.

Per ****** ********* ****

*******'* ******* ********* ******** an ********** $*** **** license *** *******. **** is ** ******** ** the ******** ****** *******, and ** **** ********* in ******** ************ *** Enterprise ********.

Simple *****

**** *** ******* ********* role ** ******* ** Genetec, ***** ** ******. Default ******** *** ** used ** **** ***** (pixelation **** ****** **** pixels), *** ***** *** more ******** ******** ******** to **** ****** ** for ***** ******* *** additional ******* ********.

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

******* ********* ***** ****** objects ** ***** ** order ** ******* *********** details. ** *******, **** is ************ ** ****** pixelating *** ******, ****** there *** ******** ******* which ******* ********* ****** removal, ********* *****.

** *******, ***** **** is ****** ***** *** closely ******* ********' ****** (shown *****), ****** ******* and *********** ** *** subject *** **** ** obscured. **** ***** ***** size ****** *** ******** area ** ******* **** of *** **** *********** subjects, *** *** ***** display **** ***** *******, such ** *** *******'* hairstyle ** ******* ********, below.

***** **** *** ** increased ** ******* **** detail, *** ***** ***** pixels ******* **** ** the **** *********** *** moving *******. **** ****** pixel **** ******** ******* privacy, *** ***** **** of *** ********** **** around *** ******* *** reduces *** ******* ** view ***** *******.

**** *** ******* ********* is **********, ** ********** stream ** ***** ** the ****** *** *** blurred ******, **** **** and ******** ***** **** use *** ******* ****** by *******. *** ******* stream *** ** ******** to *** ****** ****** in **** ** ******** video ** ***** ******** the ***** *** ******** "Remove ******* **********", ***** below.

Entire ****** ****, *** **** ****

**** **** ****** ******* ********* / ************** ** *******'* *********, Privacy ********* ***** *** entire ******, *** **** their ****. ********* ** Kiwi **** ** **** for *** *******:

  • ***** ******* ** ****:***** **** ********* ******* of ****** ********* ******** more *********, ***** ********* the ******* * **** may ** ******, ********* the *******. **** ***** especially ** * ***** issue ** *** ** under**** ***********.
  • ******** ********** ********:******, **** ***** **** clothing *** ** **** to ******** ********, *** just ****** *******. ******* the ****** ****** ******* the *********** ** ************** via ********.

Increased ****** ******* ********

** ******** ** ****** increasing *** **** ** pixels ** *** ********'* default ****, ***** *** three ******** ******** ***** remove **** ****** **** subjects.

*****, ********** *** ********* setting ** ********** **** causes *** ******** ****** to ***** ******, ***** removes ******** *** **** color *********** ** **** subjects **** ********* ** identify, ******* ********** ***** size. **** **** **** mode **** ********* *** visibility ** ****** ********, which *** **** * guard's ********* **** **** other *****.

******, *** **** **** scrambles *** *******'* ******, making ******** **** **** difficult ** *******, **** as *** *******'* ******* shirt.

*******, ************ ***** ** objects ** * ***** color, ******* ********* *******.

Solid *********** ** **** ******

** *** *****, ******* Protector ****** **** ** most ****** ******, ******** masking ****** ********, ** well ** ******** ****** simultaneously ****** ******* *** FOV, ******* ********* *** subjects ** ******* *******.

**** **** ******* ******* the *****, ******* ********* still ****** *** ******* properly.

Object ******** ******* ** *** ***** (~* ***)

** *** *******, **** walking ******* * ~* lux *** ***** *****, the *******'* **** *** occasionally ********, ***** ***** as *** ******* ****** walking **** *** ******.

*******, ** **** ***** level ******* *** ******** due ** **** ****** of ******* *****, ********* no ***** *********** *******.

face unmasked but no usable details

CPU ***** ******

** *** *****, ******* Protector ********* *** ***** by *-*% ***** *** camera ** * ** with ** ** ********* and **** ***, **** a *** ***** ******** of **** ***** *% per ******. **** ********* in *** ****:

  • ****** ****** *** *********:*****, * ****** ****** is ******* ** *** mask *** ** ******* in ******** *****. ***********, CPU **** ******** **** vary ********* ** **********, framerate, *** *********** ********.
  • ******** **********:******, **** ********* *** to ****** **********, ***** impacts *** **** **** CPU ** ***** ******** with * ********* ******** processor.

******* ** ***** *******, those **** ***** ******* of ******* ****** **** to *** *** ********** and/or ******* *** ******* Protector **** ** * second ****** ** ** not ** ****** ********* server/directory ***********.

********

*** ********* ******** **** used ****** *******.

  • ******* ******** ****: *.* SR3

Comments (31)

John Honovich

IPVM | 11/12/18 04:22pm

Genetec Privacy Protector sells for ~$200 USD per channel estimated street price

Not to steal Sean Nelson's comment... but $200 per channel, what in the world? That's a lot of money for a feature.

Undisclosed End User #1

In reply to John Honovich | 11/12/18 04:32pm

That is nothing if they do it the way they do other Kiwi features like Intrusion Detector.  If so there is an additional cost per year for SMA renewal.  So for SMA renewal it would add an additional fee to the charge you already pay per camera just to have the features.  For instance SMA for year on an enterprise camera is $50 then the intrusion detector SMA fee of $90 a year.  All on top of the one time $450 license per device using Kiwi.  

The numbers are from February so may have changed but the practice of charges remains the same.

Laurent Villeneuve

Genetec | IPVMU Certified | In reply to Undisclosed End User #1 | 11/13/18 04:19pm

Hi UD1,

I’m the product marketing manager for analytics at Genetec. I want to address your comment because we recently made changes to our Genetec Advantage policies with regards to Privacy Protector. We have eliminated the additional cost related to Privacy Protector, and it is now covered by the standard camera Advantage cost.

Regarding performance, it’s important to note that Privacy Protector uses hardware-acceleration with NVIDIA graphics cards, as UD2 mentioned in a separate comment. I’m not sure if Rob’s setup for the review included a GPU, but it is possible to achieve a higher level of performance with the right appliance design. Our new 1U Streamvault analytics appliance can anonymize 50 streams in VGA resolution for example.

Undisclosed End User #1

In reply to Laurent Villeneuve | 11/13/18 09:25pm

So the change made was just for privacy detector and not the intrusion detector as I mentioned?  At least one option is affordable.  

Avatar

Guilherme Barandas

In reply to Undisclosed End User #1 | 11/16/18 12:38am

Precisely for this reason, it is necessary to do the AMS for over 3 years so that the price falls considerably.

 

Undisclosed Integrator #3

In reply to John Honovich | 11/12/18 07:08pm

Is it? Wouldn't that be a question of how much it cost them to develop and the risk for getting ROI. I imagine there's some liability associated, too, like if it didn't work right and someone's privacy "invaded".

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #3 | 11/12/18 08:48pm

There's a lot that goes into pricing and I don't know Genetec's reasoning so I won't speculate.

But competitively, the pro case for this pricing is that (1) few have this feature, (2) it is tightly integrated into the system and (3) GDPR.

The most immediate negative is that this one feature costs about what even a Genetec VMS license costs. That's going to be hard for people to justify unless they have some legal or regulatory requirement.

However, we are talking about Genetec. They still charge for extra VMS client licenses so...

Undisclosed #4

IPVMU Certified | In reply to John Honovich | 11/12/18 07:10pm

but $200 per channel.

Genetec Pricey Protector

Avatar

Sean Nelson

Nelly's Security
In reply to John Honovich | 11/12/18 11:27pm

Gotta find a way to pay for all those lobbyists

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Sean Nelson | 11/12/18 11:44pm

You'll be happy to hear that Hikvision is #1 in US lobbyists. 

Check records here and here.

Hikvision plenty of results, already over $500,000 for the last 5 months, could hit a million for the year:

Genetec has none.

You must be relieved though that the Chinese government is increasing its ownership in your partner, right?

Avatar

Sean Nelson

Nelly's Security
In reply to John Honovich | 11/13/18 02:05pm

Hikvision plenty of results, already over $500,000 for the last 5 months, could hit a million for the year:

Genetec was able to keep this off the books by bartering with their lobbyists instead of paying them actual money. In exchange for lobbying efforts, they gave them all 4 camera systems, totalling $500,000 each.

Undisclosed #4

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Sean Nelson | 11/13/18 12:54am

Genetec Peace of Mind Bundle

Privacy Protector + Hikvision Waiver only $400/ch while supplies last

Avatar

Sergey Bystrov

NetworkOptix
11/12/18 05:52pm

In our tests, Privacy Protector increased CPU usage by 4-5% usage per camera

Wich camera? (fps@image size?)

 

...Accordingly, CPU load increase will vary according to resolution, framerate, and compression settings.

 

 

I'd would like to know how? I guess it's linear based on FPS and resolution.

 

So if 4-5% for 1080@10fps, does it mean ~12% for 30 fps? Does it mean ~15% for 4k at 10 fps?

Undisclosed #2

11/12/18 06:16pm

I believe Genetec supports server side Nvidia GPU decoding/encoding for the Privacy Protector which would significantly lower the CPU usage. 

Avatar

Igor Falomkin

AxxonSoft | 11/13/18 05:45am

Rob, thank you for the test. Does the feature work for motionless persons? 

Avatar

Rob Kilpatrick

IPVM | IPVMU Certified | In reply to Igor Falomkin | 11/13/18 04:50pm

Igor, yes it does still mask people that are motionless in the scene. In the example below the person with the blue shirt held that position for ~3-4 minutes and was still pixelated the whole time.

Undisclosed #4

IPVMU Certified | 11/13/18 04:35pm

So is the blurred video what you see live or recorded, or any combination of the two?

Avatar

Rob Kilpatrick

IPVM | IPVMU Certified | In reply to Undisclosed #4 | 11/13/18 05:56pm

The blurred video is what you would see live and recorded by default, you can remove the mask (switch to the unmasked stream) in either by just right clicking and choosing to remove privacy protection.

Michael Miller

11/13/18 06:03pm

Does it blur all people in the FOV or can you select which people are blurred and who is not blurred?

Avatar

Rob Kilpatrick

IPVM | IPVMU Certified | In reply to Michael Miller | 11/13/18 06:05pm

It blurs everybody, you can only designate areas that won't be blurred.

Avatar

Rob Kilpatrick

IPVM | IPVMU Certified | 11/13/18 08:28pm

Update:

Added a section to "Privacy Protector Basics" showing how to remove the mask from the live and recorded video.

Undisclosed #4

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Rob Kilpatrick | 11/14/18 12:12am

Nice.

So the blurry-ness is a dynamic mask?

Meaning the blurry-ness can be removed at any time?

Does exporting the video follow the settings at the time of the export?

Avatar

Rob Kilpatrick

IPVM | IPVMU Certified | In reply to Undisclosed #4 | 11/14/18 04:17pm

So the blurry-ness is a dynamic mask?

Meaning the blurry-ness can be removed at any time?

Does exporting the video follow the settings at the time of the export?

Yes, the blurry-ness can be removed at any time in live or recorded video (when you are removing the blurry-ness you are just switching to the stream without blur) and yes, the recorded video follows the settings at the time of the export.

Michael Miller

In reply to Rob Kilpatrick | 11/14/18 04:24pm

So if your recording both streams you need double the storage too?

Undisclosed #4

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Michael Miller | 11/14/18 09:20pm

So if your recording both streams you need double the storage too?

From what Rob said, there is NOT both a blurry stream and a un-blurry stream recorded.

Avatar

Rob Kilpatrick

IPVM | IPVMU Certified | In reply to Undisclosed #4 | 11/14/18 09:41pm

Sorry if I wasn't clear enough in my initial explanation.

Privacy Protector does use two different streams, one stream for the blurred video and the other stream for the normal non-blurred video. When you choose to remove the blur from the video, you are just switching from the blurred stream to the non-blurred stream.

So, yes, because it records two different streams it requires more storage.

Undisclosed #4

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Rob Kilpatrick | 11/14/18 09:58pm

Sorry if I wasn't clear enough in my initial explanation.

I don’t think you could have been clearer and I don’t think I could have been denser.

My apologies to Michael.

Undisclosed Manufacturer #5

11/15/18 10:55pm

What if I want to mask all faces except one?

Undisclosed #4

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #5 | 11/16/18 12:46am

What if I want to mask all faces except one?

Make sure the scene has only one face and set mask to off ;)

Undisclosed Integrator #6

In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #5 | 11/16/18 01:32am

Genetec has other obfuscation tools too, such as the built-in snapshot editor in Security Desk and the video masking tools in Clearance.

Avatar

Sean Patton

IPVM | 03/19/19 02:27pm

The pricing section has been updated to reflect Privacy Protector included for all 5.7/5.8 systems.

No Per Camera Licensing Cost

Genetec Privacy Protector is now is included for free with no additional license needed. Previously, it had an additional $200 MSRP license per channel.

Read this IPVM report for free.

This article is part of IPVM's 6,814 reports, 914 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