MWC’s organizer slapped with GDPR positive over biometrics ID checks due diligence

Conferences and different in-person occasions dashing to impose facial recognition on attendees in Europe with out doing the required due diligence over information safety dangers beware: The organizers of the worldwide connectivity business shindig, Cellular World Congress (MWC), which takes place yearly in Barcelona, have been fined €200,000 (~$224k) by Spain’s information safety watchdog over a breach of privateness guidelines through the present’s 2021 version.

In an 8-page resolution (PDF in Spanish) dismissing an attraction by MWC’s organizer, the GSMA, towards the infringement discovering, the Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD) concludes it infringed Article 35 of the Common Information Safety Regulation (GDPR) — which offers with necessities for finishing up an information safety influence evaluation (DPIA).

The breach discovering pertains to biometric information assortment by the GSMA on present attendees, together with for a facial recognition system it applied (referred to as BREEZZ), which supplied attendees the choice of utilizing automated determine verification to enter the venue in particular person quite than manually exhibiting their ID documentation to workers.

In the event you solid your thoughts again to 2021 you’ll recall the cell business occasion came about at a time when COVID-19 pandemic-related issues over attending in-person occasions had been nonetheless driving excessive. Not that that stopped MWC’s organizer from going forward with a bodily convention in the summertime of that 12 months — months later than the present’s traditional timing and in an inexorably slimmed down kind with far fewer exhibitors and attendees than in years previous.

The truth is fewer than 20,000 individuals registered attended MWC 2021 in particular person (17,462 to be actual), per GSMA disclosures made to the AEPD — and of these simply 7,585 really used the facial recognition system BREEZZ to entry the venue. The bulk apparently opted for the choice of guide checks of their ID paperwork. (Albeit, with MWC 2021 going down (nonetheless) within the midst of the pandemic, the GSMA additionally supplied digital attendance, with convention periods being streamed to distant viewers — and no ID checks had been required for that sort of attendance.)

Returning to the GDPR, the regulation requires {that a} DPIA is carried out proactively in conditions the place processing individuals’s information carries a excessive threat to people’ rights and freedoms. Facial recognition know-how, in the meantime, entails the processing of biometrics information — which, the place it’s used for figuring out people, is classed as particular class information underneath the GDPR. This implies makes use of of biometrics for identification inevitably falls into this sort of excessive threat class requiring proactive evaluation.

This evaluation should take into account the need and proportionality of the proposed processing, in addition to inspecting the dangers and detailing envisaged measures to handle recognized dangers. The GDPR places the emphasis on information controllers conducting a strong and rigorous proactive evaluation of dangerous processing — so the very fact the AEPD discovered the GSMA breached Article 35 signifies it didn’t display it had accomplished the required due diligence on this regard.

The truth is the regulator discovered the GSMA’s DPIA to be “merely nominal”, per the decision — saying it failed to look at “substantive features” of the info processing; nor did it assess dangers or the proportionality and necessity of the system it applied.

“What the decision concludes is {that a} [DPIA] that doesn’t ponder its important components is neither efficient nor fulfils any goal,” the AEPD provides, confirming its view that the GSMA’s DPIA didn’t fulfil the GDPR’s necessities [NB: this is a machine translation of the original Spanish text].

Extra from the AEPD’s decision: 

The [GSMA’s DPIA] doc lacks an evaluation of the need and proportionality of the processing operations with respect to its goal; using facial recognition for entry to occasions, its evaluation of the dangers to the rights and freedoms of knowledge topics referred to in Article 35(1) of the GDPR and of the measures envisaged to handle the dangers, together with safeguards, safety measures and mechanisms to make sure the safety of non-public information, and to display compliance with the GDPR, bearing in mind the rights and legit pursuits of knowledge topics and different affected individuals. It additionally lists the passport and identification card information that it states are required by the Mossos d`Esquadra [local police] which allegedly have a goal, in an effort to join it with the picture taken with the software program, which initiates the method of facial recognition, matching your identification to facilitate entry.

An outline of the GSMA’s DPIA within the AEPD’s decision means that in addition to failing to conduct an ample evaluation, the GSMA lent on a safety justification for accumulating present attendees’ passports/EU ID paperwork — saying it had been instructed by Spanish police to place in place “strict processes” for identity-screening attendees.

It additionally seems to have required attendees to consent to biometric processing of their facial information as a part of the ID add course of, with the AEPD noting consent data supplied in BREEZZ which requested the person for his or her consent to it utilizing “biometric information obtained from the pictures supplied for identification validation functions within the context of on-line registration and MWC Barcelona for venue entry functions”.  

That is vital because the GDPR units a transparent bar for consent to be a sound authorized foundation — requiring it’s knowledgeable, particular (i.e. not bundled) and freely given. Ergo you may’t pressure consent. (Whereas consent for processing delicate information like facial biometrics has a good larger bar of specific consent to be legally processed.)

It was the shortage of a free alternative for convention attendees round importing delicate biometric information which led to a criticism towards the GSMA’s information processing being lodged with the AEPD by Dr Anastasia Dedyukhina, a digital wellness speaker who had been invited to talk on a panel at MWC 2021. It’s her criticism that’s led — a few years later — to the GSMA being sanctioned now.

“I couldn’t discover a cheap justification for it,” she defined in a LinkedIn put up late final week, when she made her criticism public, discussing what she felt was a disproportionate demand by the GSMA that MWC attendees add ID paperwork. “Their web site steered that I might additionally carry my ID/passport for in-person verification, which I didn’t thoughts. Nevertheless, the organizers insisted that except I add my passport particulars, I COULD NOT attend the stay occasion and would wish to hitch just about, which I ended up doing.”

Technologist, Adam Leon Smith, who co-authored her criticism, additionally wrote about it in a LinkedIn put up — by which he warns: “Facial recognition is public areas is very delicate and if you really want to make use of it, use a wonderful lawyer and tech group.”

Explaining the issues raised of their criticism, Smith informed TechCrunch: “Firstly, we discovered that the privateness coverage stated we had been offering identification for facial recognition for identification functions on the premise of consent. Nevertheless it grew to become clear it was not really doable to opt-out. Secondly, the corporate managing the know-how was in Belarus, exterior the EU. This was the data we might discover publicly on the time of creating the complaints. I see ScanViz, the corporate offering the know-how is now itemizing a Hong Kong handle on it’s web site.”

“The AEPD was capable of request inner privateness evaluation paperwork from MWC, and was capable of see that it was outdated and inadequate. The AEPD’s resolution principally focusses on that,” he additionally stated. “There wasn’t some other particular cures, though I believe the MWC might want to conduct that threat and influence evaluation very fastidiously.”

Whereas the Spanish information safety regulator’s decision doesn’t weigh in on whether or not the GSMA’s authorized foundation for the biometric processing was legitimate or not, Smith suggests that will simply be a sequential consequence of discovering the DPIA insufficient — i.e. it may need determined a fuller technical evaluation shouldn’t be worthwhile.

“I’d not be shocked in the event that they deserted using facial recognition know-how,” he steered of the GSMA. “This sort of utility of the know-how would fall throughout the high-risk class within the newest drafts of the [EU] AI Act, meaning they would wish some type of conformity evaluation by an unbiased celebration.”

The GSMA was contacted for touch upon the AEPD’s penalty however on the time of writing it had not responded.

It’s value noting that whereas AEPD’s administrative course of on this criticism concludes with this decision, the GSMA might search to problem the end result through a authorized attraction to the Audiencia Nacional (Spain’s Nationwide Excessive Court docket).

Zooming out, as Smith factors out, the incoming pan-EU AI Act is about to introduce a risk-based framework for regulating functions of AI within the coming years.

The draft model of this laws proposed by the Fee again in 2021 features a prohibition on using distant biometrics, like facial recognition, in public locations which — if it makes it into the ultimate model — will definitely crank up the regulatory threat round implementing automated verification checks sooner or later. (Add to that, parliamentarians have been pushing to additional beef up the distant biometrics ban.) And that’s on high of current GDPR dangers for any information processors taking a sloppy strategy to threat due diligence (or certainly the laborious requirement to have a sound authorized foundation for such delicate information processing).

For its half, the GSMA has continued to offer a facial biometrics-based automated ID test choice for attendees of MWC (each this 12 months and final) — in addition to persevering with to require ID doc uploads for registration for in particular person attendance. So it will likely be attention-grabbing to see whether or not it amends its privateness disclosures and/or makes adjustments to the registration course of for MWC 2024 in gentle of the GDPR sanction. (And, if it does proceed providing a biometrics-based automated ID test choice on the present in future, it might be properly suggested to make sure its know-how provider is wholly positioned contained in the EU.)

Related Articles


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Latest Articles