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

05/15/19 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 ********* ********. *** effort ** ********* ********** constructive ***** ****** *** unreasonably ******** *** ** modern ********** ***** **** have ****** ********* ** public ******.

John Honovich

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

************** ***** **********... ********* 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 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 *** ********* ***** 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

Directory of 59 Video Surveillance Startups on Jun 25, 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...
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...
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+...

Most Recent Industry Reports

Wyze Disruptive AI Analytics Tested on Jul 17, 2019
$20 camera disruptor Wyze has released free person detection deep learning analytics to all of their users, claiming users will "Only get notified...
Anyvision Aims For 2022 Revenue of $1 Billion on Jul 17, 2019
Only 3 video surveillance manufacturers do a billion dollars or more in annual revenue - Hikvision, Dahua, and Axis. Now, Anyvision plans to join...
HD Analog vs IP Guide on Jul 16, 2019
For years, HD resolution and single cable signal/power were IP camera advantages, with analog cameras limited to much lower resolution and...
How To Troubleshoot Wiegand Reader Problems - Inverted Wiring on Jul 16, 2019
Wiegand is the dominant method of connecting access readers, but problems can arise for installers. In fact, one of the most difficult reader...
ZeroEyes Gun Detection Startup on Jul 16, 2019
A gun detection video analytics startup, ZeroEyes, is being led by a group of 6 former Navy SEALs, aiming to "save lives" by using AI to assist...
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...
Hikvision Global News Reports Directory on Jul 15, 2019
Hikvision has received the most global news reporting of any video surveillance company, ever, ranging from the WSJ, the Financial Times, Reuters,...
Vivotek Trend Micro Cyber Security Camera App Tested on Jul 15, 2019
Vivotek and Trend Micro are claiming five million blocked attacks on IP cameras, with their jointly developed app for Vivotek cameras. This new...
Beware African 50,000 IP Camera Contract Scam on Jul 12, 2019
A “Nigerian Prince” scam for the video surveillance market is going around. You, or at least we, could be lucky enough to be the single bidder for...
Axis ARTPEC-7 P1375-E Camera Tested on Jul 12, 2019
Axis claims the new P1375-E box camera with ARTPEC-7 chip delivers "clear, sharp images in any lighting condition." But how well does it do? We...

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