{"id":53531,"date":"2023-09-04T16:33:43","date_gmt":"2023-09-04T16:33:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/packetstormsecurity.com\/news\/view\/34975\/Revealed-Home-Office-Secretly-Lobbied-For-Facial-Recognition-Spy-Company.html"},"modified":"2023-09-04T16:33:43","modified_gmt":"2023-09-04T16:33:43","slug":"revealed-home-office-secretly-lobbied-for-facial-recognition-spy-company","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.threatshub.org\/blog\/revealed-home-office-secretly-lobbied-for-facial-recognition-spy-company\/","title":{"rendered":"Revealed: Home Office Secretly Lobbied For Facial Recognition Spy Company"},"content":{"rendered":"

Senior officials at the Home Office<\/a> secretly lobbied the UK\u2019s independent privacy regulator to act \u201cfavourably\u201d towards a private firm keen to roll out controversial facial recognition technology across the country, according to internal government emails seen by the Observer<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Correspondence reveals that the Home Office wrote to the Information Commissioner\u2019s Office (ICO) warning that policing minister, Chris Philp, would \u201cwrite to your commissioner\u201d if the regulator\u2019s investigation into Facewatch \u2013 whose facial recognition cameras<\/a> have provoked huge opposition after being installed in shops \u2013 was not positive towards the firm.<\/p>\n

An official from the Home Office\u2019s data and identity directorate warned the ICO: \u201cIf you are about to do something imminently in Facewatch\u2019s favour then I should be able to head that off [Philp\u2019s intervention], otherwise we will just have to let it take its course.\u201d<\/p>\n

The apparent threat came two days after a closed-door meeting on 8 March between Philp, senior Home Office officials and Facewatch<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Facewatch uses cameras to check faces against a watch list and, despite widespread concern over the technology, it has already been introduced in hundreds of high street shops and supermarkets.<\/p>\n

The use of facial recognition has provoked fierce criticism over its impact on privacy and human rights, with the European Union seeking to ban<\/a> the technology in public spaces through proposed legislation.<\/p>\n

The heavily redacted correspondence also reveals that, even before the alleged threat, an internal February ICO briefing into its Facewatch investigation \u2013 codenamed Operation Kegon 3 \u2013 indicates that the Home Office had made it plain to the regulator that facial recognition to combat retail crime was being pushed aggressively<\/a> by Philp.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Home Office have flagged that LFR [live facial recognition] in a commercial setting for crime detection\/prevention purposes is an area that is high on the minister\u2019s agenda,\u201d states an executive summary of progress in the ICO investigation into Facewatch, weeks before it officially concluded.<\/p>\n

The Home Office\u2019s enthusiasm for biometric surveillance is considered so great that the ICO classifies it as an \u201congoing risk\u201d, ranked alongside the \u201cstill unknown\u201d effects of the use of the technology in shops.<\/p>\n

The ICO told the Observer <\/em>that the Home Office had \u201cno influence\u201d on its investigation into Facewatch, while the Home Office said Philp \u2013 appointed policing minister by Rishi Sunak last October \u2013 had not attempted to influence the regulator.<\/p>\n

The ICO concluded its investigation into Facewatch on 31 March \u2013 several weeks after the Home Office warning \u2013 with a blog <\/a>explaining that no further regulatory action was required against the firm because it was \u201csatisfied the company has a legitimate purpose for using people\u2019s information for the detection and prevention of crime\u201d.<\/p>\n

\n
\"People<\/picture><\/div>
<\/svg><\/span>Facewatch has already installed cameras in hundreds of high-street shops and supermarkets despite concerns it is \u2018Orwellian\u2019.<\/span> Composite: Athena Pictures\/Guardian Design<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Privacy campaigners, however, said apparent Home Office pressure on an independent regulator required urgent investigation.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis disclosure is utterly damning and appears to show that Chris Philp intervened in the data regulator\u2019s investigation of a private facial recognition company he was having meetings with,\u201d said Mark Johnson, advocacy manager of Big Brother Watch<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Johnson added: \u201cIt raises serious questions as to whether Philp and his officials influenced the regulator\u2019s notable leniency towards the company.<\/p>\n

Data regulators operating under the same law in other European countries have issued multimillion-pound fines over live facial recognition being used to spy on shoppers, while Facewatch got off scot-free in the UK.\u201d<\/p>\n

Critics of the technology claim it breaches human rights<\/a> and is inaccurate and biased, particularly against darker-skinned people.<\/p>\n

Philp, however, is convinced that Facewatch could prove pivotal in tackling the escalating issue of retail crime at a time when the government is desperate to improve chronically low numbers of offences being solved. In the year to March, data shows that just 4.4% of all theft offences resulted in someone being charged.<\/p>\n

skip past newsletter promotion<\/a><\/p>\n