Australia’s Privacy Commissioner has weighed into the debate surrounding the sudden popularity of smartglasses after retailer Kmart sold out of an Anko budget model priced at $89.
Carly Kind noted there were similar concerns when Google launched its failed Google Glass product, and that Meta’s Meta Glasses – and cheap knock-offs thereof – are now treading similar territory.
“Just as when Google launched its original version, the public conversation is quickly turning to the implications for personal privacy of a new spate of wearables that permit a wearer to record images, video and sound in any environment, from a public bathroom to the local pub,” Commissioner Kind said in an August 7 blog post.
“There are those who will say that the prevalence of smart phones, Go-Pros, dash cams and other recording devices, not to mention facial recognition technology, means that this time round smart glasses will land in a society much more used to being recorded, in which online and offline surveillance has already become normalised, and therefore individuals should no longer have a reasonable expectation that they can live private or anonymous lives.”
In Kind’s view, however, there is a vast difference between place-based surveillance and wearables capable of discretely surveilling everyone in the vicinity.
“The proliferation of smart glasses – and their future peers, such as wearable pins or advanced earbuds – would fundamentally alter our experience of interpersonal interactions, in both private and public spaces, and undermine our ability to make some of those choices,” Kind said.
“Without knowing, we could be filmed, recorded or photographed at any time.”
Kind did admit that, for the most part, such ubiquitous surveillance would have little impact, with the stored data unlikely to be used or analysed in a way that may cause impact. She said there may even be benefits, but that there could also be exceptions that do cause harm, particularly where it might impact “children or victims of domestic violence”.
“As Australia’s privacy regulator we are giving serious consideration to the issues raised by surveillance wearables and monitoring their market presence in order to understand if scrutiny and intervention is required or warranted,” Kind said.
“Privacy remains a vitally important individual right and public value in Australia, and we at the OAIC will continue to promote and protect it even as surveillance wearables proliferate.”
Dr Fareed Kaviani, of Monash University’s Faculty of Information Technology, said that one of the key issues is a lack of consent where smartglasses and their use are concerned.
“Smart glasses change the privacy relationship in public spaces. Unlike a phone held up to record, smartglasses can capture photos, video and conversations while looking like ordinary eyewear,” Dr Kaviani said.
“People nearby may not know when they are being recorded or where that material will be shared.
“Smartglasses may deliver accessibility, communication and safety benefits, but there should be clear recording indicators, meaningful consent protections, limits in sensitive settings, age-appropriate safeguards, transparent data practices and accessible public guidance.”
Dr Kaviani’s colleague, Dr Stephanie Wescott of the Faculty of Education, has similar concerns, particularly over how such technology could be used in schools.
“AI smart glasses are not simply another piece of consumer technology. In school settings, they have the potential to expand existing forms of gendered harassment by making covert recording and image capture easier and harder to detect,” Dr Wescott said.
“We already know that girls and women experience image-based abuse, sexual harassment and misogynistic behaviour in educational settings.”
She added that schools need to understand how these devices can be misused, and how that can impact girls, women and gender-diverse students. Schools have slowly tackled the issue of smartphones in classrooms, but must act faster when it comes to smartglasses.
“Waiting until serious incidents occur would be a mistake. Schools should now be reviewing policies around privacy, consent, recording, AI-enabled technologies and acceptable device use,” Dr Wescott said.
“Just as importantly, they need to educate students about ethical technology use rather than relying solely on bans. Policy needs to keep pace with technological change if schools are to remain safe learning environments.”
Want to see more stories from trusted news sources?Make Cyber Daily a preferred news source on Google.
