San Francisco Face Recognition Ban And Surveillance Regulation Details Examined

By: Dan Gelinas, Published on May 14, 2019

San Francisco passed the legislation 8-1 today. While the face recognition 'ban' has already received significant attention over the past few weeks, there is more to it for the surveillance industry.

What has been largely ignored is that the same legislation increases regulation on various surveillance technologies, including license plate recognition, CCTV, and gunshot detection, among other common surveillance technologies, in addition to the 'ban'.

Inside this note, we examine:

  • Why face recognition is banned
  • When face recognition is allowed
  • How surveillance cameras are included in this legislation
  • Why and how city surveillance camera users must apply for approval
  • Who is exempt
  • How is enforcement to be handled
  • How violations will be handled
  • San Francisco is not the first city to pass such a law, we examine who is
  • Why some citizens are against the law
  • What are potential problems

*** ********* ****** *** legislation *-* *****. ***** the **** *********** '***' has ******* ******** *********** attention **** *** **** few *****, ***** ** more ** ** *** the ************ ********.

**** *** **** ******* ignored ** **** *** same *********** ********* ********** on ******* ************ ************, including ******* ***** ***********, CCTV, *** ******* *********, among ***** ****** ************ technologies, ** ******** ** the '***'.

****** **** ****, ** examine:

  • *** **** *********** ** banned
  • **** **** *********** ** allowed
  • *** ************ ******* *** included ** **** ***********
  • *** *** *** **** surveillance ****** ***** **** apply *** ********
  • *** ** ******
  • *** ** *********** ** be *******
  • *** ********** **** ** handled
  • *** ********* ******** ***** **** ** pass **** * ***, we ******* *** **
  • *** **** ******** *** against *** ***
  • **** *** ********* ********

[***************]

********

*** ***********, ********** ******, "*** **** ****** ************ Ordinance" ********, ***** ***** things, **** **** *********** wishing ** *******, ** which ******* **** *** use ******* ************ ************, need ** ****** ******* steps ** ***** ** gain ******** *** *** acquisition ** ** ******* the ******** *** ** certain ************ ************.

****** ********* ***** ** Supervisors (***) *** *** ***** say **** **** ** and ** *** *******. The **-****** ***** ** Supervisors ** *** *********** body *** *** **** and ****** ** *** Francisco.

*** **** ********** **** was **** ******************* ********** **** *** *** lingering ********* ***** *** limiting ***** ** *** legislation.

Why **** *********** *** ** ******

*** ***'* ******** ****** that **** ***********—******* ** page * ** *** law ** "** ********* or ****-********* ******* **** assists ** *********** ** verifying ** ********** ***** on ** **********'* ****"—*** traditionally ********** ***** ****** and ******* ** * manner **** ********* *** good ** ***** **, as **** ** *** following ********** **** **** * ** *** Legislative ****** **** *** *** *, 2019 ***** ** *********** meeting ****** ***** *** bill *** *********:

*** *** **** ****** that *********** *** *** of **** *********** ********** will ** ******* *** city *********** ** **** in *** ********* ********** from page **:

When **** *********** *** ** *******

******* ***** ****** *** acquisition ** **** ***********, use ** **** *********** data ******** ** *** parties ** ********* ***** the *** *** ** long ** *** *********** was *** ********* *** its ********* *** *** are ********** ** **** in *** ********* ********** from **** **:

How **** ****** ************ **********

************, *** *** ******* defines ************ ********** ***** it ***** ** ******** including ************ *******, **** and ********** **** ********** readers ** *** ********** and **** ******** ** seen ** *** ********* screenshot **** **** *:

New ************ ****** *********** ******* ********

*** **** *********** ******* to ******* ******* ************ technologies, **** ** ************ cameras, **** ** ******* a *****-**** *********** ******* including ********** * ************ Impact ****** ** *** the ********** ** ****** to ******* ******, *** the ********** *** **** used *** ******* ** the ****, ***** ***** details. **** ****** ** then ********* ***** ********* ** *********** Technology (****), ***** **** ******** a ************ ********** ****** which ** ******** ** the *** ***** **** a ************** **** *** board *****, ***** **** modifications ** **** *** request, ** **** ** the ********** ***** **** pages ** *** **:

Existing *********** **** ** ******** ** ****

************, *********** **** ******* have ************ ********** ** use **** ** ******* a ****-********* ******* ** justify ********* *** ** the **********, ********** * proposed ************ ********** ****** ordinance ** *** *** within *** **** ** the ********* **** ** the ***, ** **** in *** ******* **** page ** *****:

**** ***-*** **** ***** was ******* ***** ****** the **** **** *** days.

***********, **** **** ** compile ***** ********* ** surveillance ********** *** *** it ** *** **** within ** **** ** the ********* **** ** the *** ** **** in *** ********** **** page ** *****:

**********, *** *** ****** that ** ******** **** the *** *** *** been ******** ****** *** days ***** *** ********** has ********* ***** ******** Surveillance **********  ****** *********, then **** *** ** discontinue *** ** *** technology ***** ** ** approved, ** **** ** the ********** **** **** 15 *****:

*******, ** ******* **** minute *********, *** *** amended *** ******** ** state **** * ********** could ******** ** *** their ******** ************ ********** until *** *** **** their ********.

**********

*******, ** *** ************ technology ** ******** *** already **** ******** ** the ***, **** * department ******* ** *** that ********** **** *** go ******* *** **** multi-step *******, ** **** in *** ********** **** page ** *****:

*** *** **** ****** city *********** ** *** surveillance ********** **** ******** to ** **** * non-city-department *** ***** **** a ******* ******** ** seen ** *** ********* from **** ** *****:

Who ** ******

********* ********* ********** ** airports *** ******** *** exempt **** *** ***, as **** ** *** screenshot **** **** * below:

***********, *** ******** ******* and *** ******* *** conditionally ****** **** ********** if **** ******* **** surveillance ********** ** ********* to ***** **** *** that ********** **** *** law ********** **** * prosecutorial ** ************* ********. The *** **** ******** that ** **** ***** the *** ** *** technology ** **** * matter ** ****** ******. In ********, ** **** cases, ** ** ******** that *** ******** ******* or ******* **** * declaration **** **********, ** even ** *********** ** why ********** ** ***********, would ******** ***** ****, as **** ** *** screenshot **** **** * below:

How ** *********** ** ** *******

********** **** *** *** will ** ******** *** an ****** ***** ** the **********'* ******, ** seen ** *** ******* from **** ** *****:

How ********** **** ** *******

*** *** ****** **** a ********* ** *** law ** ********** ** injury *** **** *** person *** ***** ***** action ******* *** **** as **** ** *** following ********** **** **** 17:

San ********* ** *** *** ***** **** ** **** **** * ***

***** *** ********* *** received ************* *********, *** county ** ***** ***** ****** * law ** ****, *** ************-********** *** Community-Safety ********* **** ********* forces ********* ******** ** expose *** ******* ************ currently ** *** *** seek ******** ****** ********* and ***** *** ************ technology, ** **** ** the********** ** *** **** report*****:

***** ***** ******'* ********** ** ****** * million ********* *** **** ***** has * ****** ********** than *** *********, ** itself.

*** **** ** ******* ** March ** **** **** passed * ******* *** requiring ************ *** ****** debate ***** ** **** agencies ********* ************ ************, as **** ** ************* ** * **** story*****:

California ***** *** *******

************, ********** ******* ***** Hill **** *** ***** County ********* ******* *****-**** surveillance ********** ***********,****** **** ****, **** was **** ** ******** for ******** ** *** of ****. *******, ******** **** ** *********, ********* ** *** Senator's ******. ** *** other ****, *** ******* in *** ********* ***** restart ******* ** **** this ** *** ****** state.

Why **** ******** *** ******* *** ***

************** ****** **** *** May * ******* ** the ***** ** ******************* * ***** ******** of ****** ******** ** the ******** ***.

******* ** **** ********* was* ****** **** * neighborhood-watch-type *****,**** ***** ****** ****** ** ******** ban ** **** *********** is **** ** "******** the ****  *** **** the *********":

************* **** * ********* neighborhood **************** **** ********** *** enforcement's ****** ** ************ technologies **** ************, ******* plate ***********, *** ******* detection ******* ***** ******* to ******* *** ****** and ******* ** ********* criminals **** *** ********* is *** ******* ***** safety:

Input **** ***

*** ******** ******** *********** said *** ******* ** the *** *********** "**************" about ********** *** *** an ******* ** ** "ill-informed ******":

******* ** *** ********* represents *** ******* ****** example ***** ************** ***** technology *** **** ** ill-informed ******** **** ****** public ******. *** ******** would ****** ******* ******* on **** ********, ******* intended ** ******** ***** the *** ** **** common ************ **** ***** surveillance. ****** **** ********* unproven ***********, ********* ******* should ******* ****** ******* uses ** ***** ************ in *** *.*. *** related ****, ******** *** common **** ********* **** address **** ******* *** civil ********* ********. *** ****** to ********* ********** ************ rules ****** *** ************ restrict *** ** ****** technology ***** **** **** become ********* ** ****** ******.

*** **** ********* **** they ****** ** *********** ********* ** ********* and **********’* (****)******** ** **** ***** opinion:

*** ** *** ******* that *** ****** **** is ****’* *********** *** highly ********* ********. * would ********* *** ** review ***** **** ** work ** ***** ******** and ****** ***********. ***** technology ******* *** ******* and *** ********* **** is **** ** *** public.

*******, ***** ***** ** research ********* ******* *** NIST *******, **** ******** alone ** ************ ** prove **** **** *********** should *** ** ****** or *********. **** **** not **** * ******** on *** **********'* ***, just ****** *** ******** or *** ******* ********** are. 

** **** *** *** received * ***** ** our ******** ** *** SIA ** ************ ****'* results.

Details ** *** ***

*** ******* ******* *** the *** ************ ***** ******. ***** ******** ** the *** ******* *************** *****,****** ***,******* ******, ********** *****. *********** ***** *** ****** were ****** **** *** May ** *** ******* and *** *** ****. 

*** *** **** **** effect **** **, ****, or ** **** ***** enactment, ** **** ** the ********* ********** **** page ** ** *** legislative ****** ****** *****:

*** ***, ** ******* 19B,  ** ** ********* to ****** ********* ************** ****.

Potential ********

*** ******* *** ******** of ******** ********* *** use ** ******* ************ presents **** ********* *** a ********** ***** *** city *********** **** ***** reports *** ******** ** the ***.

************, ********** **** ****** the ******* ** ******** Attorney **** ********** ** a ****** ************* **** the ********** ** ********* and ** *********** ** why *********** ***** ******** is * ********* ******** for *****.

**-***** *********** ** *****, procedures, ******** ******* *** be ***** ** ************** ****** ** **** 23 ** *** *********** Packet****** *****.

Comments (24)

Undisclosed #1

05/15/19 12:50am

***, **** **** ****** private ********* **** ******** public *******, **** ** the ******** ******** ***** multiple ************ ************** ******* systems **** **** *** side ** ************. ******* such ** ********, **** and ****. * **** find ** ******* **** a *** ** ******* businesses ******** **** ****** exterior ******* ********* **** and ***** **** **** a  ****** ****** *** and * ****** ****** FOV. *** **** *** running ** ** **** as ***** *********. 

* **** ** ******* at * **** ***** for ********** ** ******* to *** ** (****** conspiracy ******** ****).

**** ******, ** ******* to ***** *****..***** ** FR ** *** ***** Stadium ** ** ** possible **** ******* ******** can **** ********* ** the **** ** *** of *** ***** ***** Office ** *** ******* approval?

Avatar

Dan Gelinas

IPVM | In reply to Undisclosed #1 | 05/15/19 01:50am

** *********** #*. *** law ******* ****** ***********, not ******* ********** ** homes. **** ******* **** Muni ** ********. ******, the ******* ******* ** the **** ********* ************ during *** ******* **** the ****** *** *** to **** ** ***** any ****** ******** ******* in ***** **** *** Muni *******. ** **** that **** **** ****** their ************ ********** ******, it **** ****** ** accepted ***** ****. 

*** *** **** *** Santa ***** *** ******** from *** *********'* ** that ** *** *** outright *** ********, **** recognition ********.

***** ***.

Undisclosed Manufacturer #2

05/15/19 12:57am

** **** ***** ******* your **** **** *** go ** ***** ** go ** ******** ** this ***** **** ** considered ******* ** *** community.

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #2 | 05/15/19 01:02am

*** ******* **** *** make ***** ***** *** SF *** ** ** government ***, *** ******* use. ****, *** *** use **** *** ** your **** *** *** government ****** *** ** to *** ** **** home, ***.

Undisclosed Manufacturer #2

In reply to John Honovich | 05/15/19 08:55pm

**** *** **** ********** law *** ** ******** does *** ******** ****** to ********** ** *******:

***** ** ***** **** in *** ********* **** leave *** ********** **** head ** ******.

 

 

John Honovich

IPVM | 05/15/19 01:03am

***, **** ****.*** **** ******** *** meeting /**** ******* ** ** ******** below:

Undisclosed #1

05/15/19 01:09am

****....**** *** **** **!

Avatar

Dan Gelinas

IPVM | 05/15/19 11:25am

**'** ***** *** ********* input **** *** **** the ***** *****:

Input **** ***

*** ******** ******** *********** said *** ******* ** the *** *********** "**************" about ********** *** *** an ******* ** ** "ill-informed ******":

******* ** *** ********* represents *** ******* ****** example ***** ************** ***** technology *** **** ** ill-informed ******** **** ****** public ******. *** ******** would ****** ******* ******* on **** ********, ******* intended ** ******** ***** the *** ** **** common ************ **** ***** surveillance. ****** **** ********* unproven ***********, ********* ******* should ******* ****** ******* uses ** ***** ************ in *** *.*. *** related ****, ******** *** common **** ********* **** address **** ******* *** civil ********* ********. *** ****** to ********* ********** ************ rules ****** *** ************ restrict *** ** ****** technology ***** **** **** become ********* ** ****** ******.

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Dan Gelinas | 05/15/19 11:39am

************** ***** **********... ********* ******** assumptions

*** ** ***. ******* ******** *** ******* of ****** ***********. **** ******* ** original ******** *** *** done ** **, *** that ******, **** ******* of?

** *** ***** ** represent *** ********, ** it ******, ***** * substantive ******** ***** ** actual ********, *** * knee **** ******* **********.

Avatar

Jack Ives

In reply to John Honovich | 05/15/19 01:04pm

******** *** **** *********** with *** **** ***** by ****** *** ***** by *** ************ ** one ********* ***'* * solid ********** *** ******* an ****** ***** ** technology ** *** **** did. ***** * **** no ********* ** **** the *** *** ** may *** ** ******* of, *** *** **** for **** ******, * don't ***** **** ******* capability *** ** ** reason ** ***** *** the *********** **** **** is ***-******** ******.

******* **** *********** ** an ******* ******* ** many *******, ***** *** local ******** ** **** as ******* *************. ** single ********** ** ***** to ** *********** *** all ********** *** ******* the ********** ** **** of *** ********* ****** (sorry *** *** ***) stakeholders. *** *******, **** recognition ******* **** ** de-duplicate ***** ******* ********* to ****** *********** **** a ****** ******** (******* credential) ***** ******** ** a **** ****** *** usage ** * ****-**** application **** ********** ********* entry ** ****** ** an *******. ****-******** ****** is **** ******* ** well-informed ***********. ********* *** key **** ** ****** objective *** ******** ******* data ********* ** ******* the *************** ** * technology. **** **** * great *** ** ******* algorithms ** * *** environment ** ***** ***** care ** ******** *** the ***** *** *********** and *** ******* *******. 

****** ****, *** *** Biometric ********** ***** ** a ******* ******* ****** place ** *** ******** Test ******** *** ** an *********** **** ** face, **** *** *********** technologies *** ******* *** needs ** ******** ******** stakeholders. ** ********** ** the ****(*) (* ********* can't ***** *** *** or *** ***** ** MdTF) *** ** *********** evaluate ********* ******* ***** goals *** ** ******* and ********** **** ****** through ****** ** ***** of *****. 

**** ********* *********** ** either ***** **** **** a **** *********** ********** does *** **** * threat ** "...***** ****** and ******* ** * manner **** ********* *** good ** ***** **." Certainly *** - *** tool *** ** ******* and ****** (****** ***** use * *********** ** a ******?).

** ***** ** ********* selecting *** ***** **** for *** ***, *** having *** ********** *** data ********* ** **** the ******** ** *** first *****, *** *** best **** ** ******** the *** ** ************ like **** *********** ** public ******. 

*** *********** **********/******* **** recognition *** *** ******* restrictive ** ***** ************ that ***** *** ****** interest. *** *******, * truly **** ** *** how ********** **** ******* detection ******* ** **********'* civil ****** ** ******** public ****** ** ***** banned.

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Jack Ives | 05/15/19 01:59pm

***** * **** ** knowledge ** **** *** SIA *** ** *** not ** ******* **

* **** ****** ** knowledge *** ********** **** what *** ** ******* of *** **** *** 100% *** ******* ** assessing ****** *********** ** really *** ********** *** that ******, *.*., ** ******* **** *** America ********** *** *** ************ ***** ** ISC ****'* **** *** IP ******.

*** ******** *** *** should ****** ** **** ******* ****** ** ** thoughtfully *** **** ********.

*** ****** *** *** own ***** *** ******** the ****, **** ***** get ******'* *********. * knee **** ******** ******** cannot ******* **** *** resources *** ******** **** the **** *** ****.

Avatar

Jack Ives

In reply to John Honovich | 05/15/19 04:04pm

** **** **** * would ***** ** **** experience **** ****** ** the ******* ********* ** SIA. * ***** *** real ***** ****** (******** with ***) **** *** industry ****** ****** ** the ********* ***** ********. ********** I ***** *** *** putting * *** ** emphasis ** *** ****'* test ** ******'* ******* and **** ****** *** position **** *** ** is ***. *** **** is **** *** **** results **** **** ** and ** **** ********** situation ***** (****) ** nothing ** ********.

***, ** *** *** Francisco ***** ** *********** wants ** *** *********** based ** *** **** tests, * ***** **** are ** ***** *******. However, *** *********** **** Dan *** ******* ***** the *** **** ** ban *** **** *********** and **** *** ****** stipulate *** **** ******* at *** ********** **** face *********** "...*** ************* threatened ***** ****** *** liberty ** * ****** that ********* *** **** it ***** **." **** certainly **** **** *** negative ****-**** ******** *** and * ***** ** misplaced.  

Avatar

Dan Gelinas

IPVM | In reply to Jack Ives | 05/15/19 02:02pm

***** ****,

***** *** *** **** comment! **** ** ** clear, *** *** **** not *** ******* *********. Only **** *********** *** by **** *********** *** banned ** **** ***.

***** ************ ****** "************ technologies," **** ******* *********, need ** ** ******** by *** ***** ** Supervisors ***** ** ***** appraisal ** ***  ************ Technology ****** ******** ** them ** ****, ***** they ******* ***** ** the ********** **********'* ************ Technology ****** ******.

* ***** ****'* ********* here ** *** ** gunshot ********* ******** ** surveillance **********? *** *** defines ************ ********** **:

*** ********, ********** ******, system ********* ** ********** device, ** ******* ****** used, ********, ** ********* intended ** *******. ******, process. ** ***** *****, electronic, ******, ********, *******, biometric, ********* ** ******* information************ ********** ****, **, capable ** ***** ********** with, *** ********** ** group. (******** *****)

***** * ******* ** is ******* *** ******* detection ** *** **** audio *** ******* *********, I ***'* ***** *** gunshot ** ******* *** be ************ ********** **** an ********** ** *****. 

******* ********* ***** ** be **** ** ******** the **** ** ***, but *** * ******** person ******** * ***.

***** ** ********* ******** information ********* *** *** gunshot, *** **** ****** be ************ ********** **** any ********** ** *****.

Avatar

Jack Ives

In reply to Dan Gelinas | 05/15/19 04:07pm

****** ***, *** ****** there *** **** ** me. 

Avatar

Dan Gelinas

IPVM | In reply to John Honovich | 05/15/19 03:17pm

** ******** * ***** back **** *** ** response ** ****'* ******** above:

* ***** ***** *** to *** ******** *********. One ** *** ******* that *** ****** **** is ****’* *********** *** highly ********* ********. * would ********* *** ** review ***** **** ** work ** ***** ******** and ****** ***********. ***** technology ******* *** ******* and *** ********* **** is **** ** *** public.

** ***** **** ******* back:

*** *** *** ************ NIST *******? ***, ***** is ******** *** ** that ***** **** ** should *** ** ********* or ******? **** ** not ****** * ******** on *** ***, **** how ******** ** *** certain ********** ***.

** **** *** *** heard **** **** *** with * ********.

Evan Nardone

In reply to John Honovich | 05/15/19 03:50pm

* **** *** ***'* response ** ** ******* more ** *** ************** of **** *******, ****** state, *** ******* ****** than **** ******* ** the ****** **********. ** all **** *** ****** of *** ******* ** softwares *** *** ******** biases **** *** ******* though. *** * ***** tend ** ***** **** the *** **** **** ban *** **** **** to ** **** ******'* fear ** *** ********** "spying" ** **** **** anything ****. *** **** would **** **** **** better ** ****** * comprehensive **** ********** *** protection *********** ******* ** an ******** ***. 

Douglas Button

05/15/19 12:47pm

**** ****, * ***'* think *** ** *** of ****.  ****'* "*******" of *** ****** *********** system *** *********** **** all ****** *********** ******* are ****** *** ********** is *** **** * would ******** * ******** evaluation ** *** **********.  SIA *** *** ***** to **** ****** *********, only **** ***** *** current *** ***** ** the *.*. **** ***** help ******** *** *********'* hard-line ******** ** ************.  I ***** ** ********** in ******* **** ******** the **** ******* ** developing **** ***********.

****** *** *** ***** report ***!

Avatar

Dan Gelinas

IPVM | In reply to Douglas Button | 05/15/19 12:48pm

***** ***, ****.

Undisclosed #3

05/15/19 02:18pm

*****'* * ******* ********** between **** ******* ******* using ****** *********** *** creepy ********* ***/** ******** when **** *********** ****** enters ***** ******** *** when * ********** **** it ** *** ** citizens *** *********** **** away ***** *******.  ** far ** * *** this, ** **** ***** government *********** ** *** people ***** ******** *** it's ***** ** ***** agencies ** ******* ***** use ** *** ********** and **** *** ********* of **** ********** ******.  If ****'* ***** ** cause *** ********* ** somehow ****** "******" **** that **** *** ****** problems **** **** ***.

Undisclosed #4

In reply to Undisclosed #3 | 05/19/19 07:49pm

"** *** ** * see ****, ** **** makes ********** *********** ** the ****** ***** ******** and **'* ***** ** force ******** ** ******* their *** ** *** technology *** **** *** existence ** **** ********** public. "

********* *** ** *** in **** *** ***, I ***** **** **** take ** **** ***% - *** ** ** along **** ******.

** *** **** *** LE ** ** **** to ** **** **** do ** *** **** of ***** *********.  *** when ***** **** ** agencies**** *** ************ '******' *** ********** that **** **** *****/********* (think ********* - *****,  not **************, *** ******* in **** ***********) ** citizens *** ********* *** worried.

** ** *** ********** the ****-**** ******** ** 'accountability ** ***** **** serve' **** **** **** trialing *** **** *** tech, **** ** ******** would *** ***** ********** ** ** ******* about *** *** **** and ** ******** ******* - *** ****** ***** of ****** **** *** Brave *** ***** ***** fall *** *************.  

Avatar

Sean Patton

IPVM | 05/15/19 03:29pm

** ******* ******* *** skepticism **** ****, ************ because ** ** ** San ********* ** ******* to **** *******:

** * **** ***** dozens (********?) ** *******, venture-funded ********* ****** ** be ********** **** *********** solutions, ** ** ****** creating * ******** *********** for ***** ******* ********* to ****** ****/****** ****** cameras, ******* *** **** recognition ** * *******, and ******* **** **** back ** *** ****. This ***** **** ** the******** *** **** ********** model*** *****.

******* * ** **************** this ******* ** *** law, ***** ** **** as *** **** ** not ********** *** **** recognition, ***** ** ** issue?

Avatar

Dan Gelinas

IPVM | In reply to Sean Patton | 05/15/19 03:47pm

**** *** ******* *'** done, ****, * ******* you're *****. *** *** states **** *** **** department *** *** **** recognition **** **** * 3rd ***** ** **** as ** ****'* "*******" said **** *** **** document's *** ********* *** use:

Michael Miller

05/16/19 12:28am

 

*** **** ******** ***** Ban **** *********** ************ By *********. 

** *** **** **** that *** ********* ***** ** ****** the ***** **** ** the ****** ****** ** ban ********** *** ** face *********** ************, *** New **** ***** *********** introduced * **** ** ban *** *** ** facial *********** ************ ** residential *********.

Avatar

Vincent Tong

05/16/19 04:51pm

**** ** ********** ** anything ** ******** 

Login to read this IPVM report.
Why do I need to log in?
IPVM conducts unique testing and research funded by member's payments enabling us to offer the most independent, accurate and in-depth information.

Related Reports

Directory of 68 Video Surveillance Startups on Sep 18, 2019
This directory provides a list of video surveillance startups to help you see and research what companies are new or not yet broadly known. 2019...
Dahua, Hikvision, Huawei US Ban Rules Released on Aug 08, 2019
The US government has released rules on how the 2018 NDAA ban of Dahua, Hikvision, and Huawei will be implemented when it takes effect in 5...
Avigilon ACC7 VMS Tested on Jul 22, 2019
Avigilon's Control Center 7 boldly claims it will "transform live video monitoring" with the new Focus of Attention "AI-enabled" interface. We...
Motorola Acquires Watchguard, Adds to Vigilant And Avigilon on Jul 15, 2019
2 years ago, Motorola had no position nor relevancy to video surveillance. Now, they own major video surveillance, LPR and body camera providers...
Sighthound Transforms Into Enterprise AI Provider Profile on Jun 14, 2019
Sighthound is now rapidly expanding its R&D team, building an enterprise AI service. This may come as a surprise given their origins 6 years...
ADT Eliminating Acquired Brands, Unifying Under 'Commercial' Brand on Jun 14, 2019
ADT is eliminating the brands of the many integrators it has acquired over the past few years, including Red Hawk, Aronson Security Group (ASG),...
Embattled $400 Million China Funded Philippines Surveillance System Proceeds on Jun 13, 2019
An embattled 12,000 camera surveillance system project that will cost ~$400 million will proceed. The project contract was awarded, had its...
OpenALPR Doubles Prices on Jun 06, 2019
There is no 'race to the bottom' in cloud / AI video surveillance. In May, Verkada increased their prices. Now, OpenALPR is doing the same with a...
"New" Arecont Fixes Failures "Without A Fight" on Jun 05, 2019
The "old" Arecont was infamous not only for its camera failures but for making their "partners" fight to get them fixed. IPVM drew the ire of...
Pelco Sold Off, Now Independent on May 28, 2019
Pelco has been sold off by Schneider Electric, completing Schneider's terrible tenure, but giving Pelco a chance at life. IPVM spoke with...

Most Recent Industry Reports

ONVIF Suspends Huawei on Sep 20, 2019
Huawei has been 'suspended', and effectively expelled, from ONVIF so long as US sanctions remain on the mega Chinese manufacturer. Inside this...
Open Access Controller Guide (Axis, HID, Isonas, Mercury) on Sep 19, 2019
In the access control market, there are many software platforms, but only a few companies that make non-proprietary door controllers. Recently,...
Axis Perimeter Defender Improves, Yet Worse Than Dahua and Wyze on Sep 19, 2019
While Axis Perimeter Defender analytics improved from our 2018 testing, the market has improved much faster, with much less expensive offerings...
Directory of 68 Video Surveillance Startups on Sep 18, 2019
This directory provides a list of video surveillance startups to help you see and research what companies are new or not yet broadly known. 2019...
Uniview Prime Series 4K Camera Tested on Sep 18, 2019
Is the new Uniview 'Prime' better than the more expensive existing Uniview 'Pro'? In August, IPVM tested Uniview 4K 'Pro' but members advocated...
US Army Base To Buy Banned Honeywell Surveillance on Sep 17, 2019
The U.S. Army's Fort Gordon, home to their Cyber Center of Excellence, has issued a solicitation to purchase Honeywell products that are US...
Vivotek "Neural Network-Powered Detection Engine" Analytics Tested on Sep 17, 2019
Vivotek has released "a neural network-powered detection engine", named Smart Motion Detection, claiming that "swaying vegetation, vehicles passing...
Schmode is Back, Aims To Turn Boulder AI Into Giant on Sep 16, 2019
One of the most influential and controversial executives in the past decade is back. Bryan Schmode ascended and drove the hypergrowth of Avigilon...
Manufacturers Unhappy With Weak ASIS GSX 2019 And 2020 Shift on Sep 16, 2019
Manufacturers were generally unhappy with ASIS GSX, both for weak 2019 booth traffic and a scheduling shift for the 2020 show, according to a new...

What IPVM Is

The world's leading authority on video surveillance, with 200,000+ visits monthly.

  • Articles on cameras, video analytics, VMS, and trends
  • Tests showing actual performance and problems
  • Courses in surveillance, access control, etc
  • Camera Calculator for designing systems

Dedicated To Independence

We're dedicated to staying independent and objective. We're the only industry source to refuse any and all advertisements, sponsorship, and consulting from manufacturers. Why?