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 **** **:

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.

*** **** ** ******* in ***** ** **** also ****** * ******* law ********* ************ *** public ****** ***** ** city ******** ********* ************ technologies, ** **** ** the********** ** * **** 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 ********* ********. *** effort ** ********* ********** constructive ***** ****** *** unreasonably ******** *** ** modern ********** ***** **** have ****** ********* ** public ******.

*** **** ********* **** 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 *** ******* *************** *****,****** ***,******* ******, ********** *****. *********** ***** *** Walton **** ****** **** the *** ** *** meeting *** *** *** vote.

*** *** **** **** 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

05/14/19 07:50pm

***, **** **** ****** 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 | 05/14/19 08:50pm

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

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

***** ***.

Undisclosed Manufacturer #2

05/14/19 07:57pm

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

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #2 | 05/14/19 08:02pm

*** ******* **** *** 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 ********* ********. *** effort ** ********* ********** constructive ***** ****** *** unreasonably ******** *** ** modern ********** ***** **** have ****** ********* ** public ******.

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Dan Gelinas | 05/15/19 06:39am

************** ***** **********... ********* unproven ***********

*** ** ***. ******* ******** *** ******* 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 04:59pm

***** * **** ** 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 ********* ***** ********. Personally * ***** *** are ******* * *** of ******** ** *** ACLU's **** ** ******'* product *** **** ****** the ******** **** *** FR ** ***. *** fact ** **** *** ACLU ******* **** **** on *** ** **** particular ********* ***** (****) is ******* ** ********.

***, ** *** *** 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 12:07pm

****** ***, *** ****** 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 10:50am

* **** *** ***'* 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 07:47am

**** ****, * ***'* 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 07:48am

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

Undisclosed #3

05/15/19 09:18am

*****'* * ******* ********** 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 11:47am

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

Michael Miller

05/15/19 07:28pm

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

** *** **** **** that *** ********* ***** to ****** *** ***** city ** *** ****** States ** *** ********** use ** **** *********** surveillance, *** *** **** State *********** ********** * bill ** *** *** use ** ****** *********** surveillance ** *********** *********.

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

ACRE Acquires RS2, Explains Acquisition Strategy on Apr 19, 2019
ACRE continues to buy, now acquiring RS2, just 5 months after buying Open Options. One is a small access control manufacturer from Texas, the...
ISC West 2019 Report on Apr 12, 2019
The IPVM team has finished at the Sands looking at what companies are offering and how they are changing their positioning. See below for 50+...
Failed Integrator Rollup, Securadyne Sells to Guard Giant Allied on Apr 10, 2019
One of the most ambitious integrator rollups of the decade has reached its conclusion—selling to a mega guard company. Allied Universal has...
Panasonic Favorability Results 2019 on Mar 27, 2019
Panasonic favorability declined, as the company struggled to find its way amidst a changing market and its ill-timed decision to become a Dahua...
Lenel Favorability Results 2019 on Mar 26, 2019
The positive news for Lenel is that integrators do not dislike them as much as they used to.  The negative news for Lenel is that integrators...
Large Hospital Security End User Interview on Mar 21, 2019
This large single-state healthcare system consists of many hospitals, and hundreds of health parks, private practices, urgent care facilities, and...
Genetec Security Center 5.8 Tested on Mar 19, 2019
Genetec has released Version 5.8. This comes after a wait of more than a year that caused frustrations for many Genetec partners. Our previous...
OpenALPR Acquired By Mysterious Novume on Mar 13, 2019
Startup OpenALPR has been acquired by Novume, a company virtually unknown in the industry. While there are many LPR providers (see our directory),...
Milestone Machine Learning Camera Auto-Setting Examined on Mar 13, 2019
Milestone wants to improve image quality using Machine Learning to solve the problem of "a camera doesn't know what it is being used for",...

Most Recent Industry Reports

Kidnapping Victim Rescued With Video From Ring Doorbell Camera on May 24, 2019
A kidnapping victim was rescued within 24 hours, with the police crediting video from a Ring Doorbell camera as key to solving the case. A girl was...
NJ Law Requires Apprenticeship For Public Works Integrators on May 24, 2019
Few integrators do a formal apprenticeship program. However, now a NJ law is requiring any integrator on public works projects (such as state...
Security / Privacy Journalist Sam Pfeifle Interview on May 24, 2019
Sam Pfeifle is best known as the outspoken former Editor of Security Systems News. After that, he was publications director at the International...
Verkada Video Quality Problems Tested on May 23, 2019
Verkada suffers from numerous video quality problems, not found in commercial IP cameras, new IPVM testing of Verkada vs Axis and Hikvision...
Average Frame Rate Video Surveillance 2019 on May 23, 2019
What is the average frame rated used in video surveillance systems? In IPVM's 2011 statistics, the average was 6-8fps increasing to ~10fps in...
Dahua USA Celebrates 5 Years of Errors on May 22, 2019
Dahua USA is, in their own words, 'celebrating' 5 years in North America or as trade magazine SSN declared: Dahua Technology finds success in...
Access Control Job Walk Guide on May 22, 2019
Significant money can be saved and problems avoided with an access control job walk if you know what to look for and what to ask. By inviting...
ASCMA / Monitronics Declares Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Plan on May 22, 2019
Monitronics is entering into Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The company, also called Ascent Capital Group Inc., aka ASCMA, aka Brinks Home Security,...
US Considers Sanctions Against Hikvision and Dahua on May 22, 2019
The US government is considering blacklisting "up to 5" PRC surveillance firms, including Hikvision and Dahua, Bloomberg reported, with human...
Axis ~$150 Outdoor Camera Tested on May 21, 2019
Axis has released the latest in their Companion camera line, the outdoor Companion Dome Mini LE, a 1080p integrated IR model aiming to compete with...

The world's leading video surveillance information source, IPVM provides the best reporting, testing and training for 10,000+ members globally. Dedicated to independent and objective information, we uniquely refuse any and all advertisements, sponsorship and consulting from manufacturers.

About | FAQ | Contact