The Privacy Commissioner has just given facial recognition technology a "cautious tick" after Foodstuffs trialled it in some of its supermarkets. In my humble opinion this is a massive failure to protect the privacy of ordinary New Zealanders.
This isn't about stopping shoplifters. It's not about keeping staff safe. It's about watching and tracking people without their permission.
It's about collecting your face, your movements, what car you drive, and tying it all back to who you are. That’s surveillance, plain and simple. And now it's being quietly rolled out in your local supermarket while the people meant to protect your rights look the other way.
Instead of pushing back against this kind of invasive tech, the Privacy Commissioner has cracked the door open. That little “cautious tick” is all retailers need to keep going. Now Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says a centralised facial recognition system should be considered, a shared database where your face could be scanned and flagged across multiple businesses. That’s not safety. That’s a live watchlist. And it’s happening without any real public conversation.
The Commissioner’s office even suggested this centralised setup might reduce the risk of data breaches. That’s not just naive, it’s dangerous. Putting everyone’s biometric data in one place makes it easier to exploit, not harder. It's one step away from building an infrastructure that can monitor all of us, all the time.
Many retailers in New Zealand already use crime-reporting software like Auror, which includes number plate recognition capabilities, and it wouldn’t be a stretch to imagine facial recognition quietly being integrated into the same system. That should raise serious red flags. From personal experience, trying to access information held in Auror through the Privacy Act is nearly impossible - they claim they don’t hold the data, only the retailers do. It's a shadowy game of finger-pointing and loopholes that leaves individuals in the dark about what information is being collected, stored or shared about them. It’s corporate surveillance buried behind legal grey areas.
Retail NZ won’t name names, but admits other big chains are getting ready to roll out facial recognition too. And why wouldn’t they? The so-called privacy watchdog has just given them a green light. They claim it’s just one tool in the toolbox, alongside things like fog cannons and body cams. But let’s be clear - none of those scan your face and track you every time you walk through a door.
Across the ditch, Bunnings is being dragged through court for using this tech. The Australian privacy watchdog is doing its job. Ours just gave it a polite nod.
his is the normalisation of mass surveillance in everyday life. Once facial recognition becomes normal in supermarkets, it will spread. It’ll turn up in malls, petrol stations, public transport, schools and workplaces. You won’t be able to go anywhere without being scanned and watched.
The Privacy Commissioner is supposed to protect the public, not rubber-stamp tech that treats everyone like a potential criminal. A “cautious tick” isn’t good enough. We need a hard stop.
Facial recognition is not just a tool. It is the foundation of a future where privacy disappears and surveillance becomes a way of life. And the people in charge of guarding our rights just failed to stop it.
Your face is yours. Not theirs. Not the government’s. Not the supermarket’s. If we don’t speak up now, we’ll lose the right to simply exist in public without being watched.
And when that happens, we’ll know exactly who let it happen.
Matua Kahurangi is just a bloke sharing thoughts on New Zealand and the world beyond. No fluff, just honest takes. He blogs on https://matuakahurangi.com/ where this article was sourced.
Instead of pushing back against this kind of invasive tech, the Privacy Commissioner has cracked the door open. That little “cautious tick” is all retailers need to keep going. Now Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says a centralised facial recognition system should be considered, a shared database where your face could be scanned and flagged across multiple businesses. That’s not safety. That’s a live watchlist. And it’s happening without any real public conversation.
The Commissioner’s office even suggested this centralised setup might reduce the risk of data breaches. That’s not just naive, it’s dangerous. Putting everyone’s biometric data in one place makes it easier to exploit, not harder. It's one step away from building an infrastructure that can monitor all of us, all the time.
Many retailers in New Zealand already use crime-reporting software like Auror, which includes number plate recognition capabilities, and it wouldn’t be a stretch to imagine facial recognition quietly being integrated into the same system. That should raise serious red flags. From personal experience, trying to access information held in Auror through the Privacy Act is nearly impossible - they claim they don’t hold the data, only the retailers do. It's a shadowy game of finger-pointing and loopholes that leaves individuals in the dark about what information is being collected, stored or shared about them. It’s corporate surveillance buried behind legal grey areas.
Retail NZ won’t name names, but admits other big chains are getting ready to roll out facial recognition too. And why wouldn’t they? The so-called privacy watchdog has just given them a green light. They claim it’s just one tool in the toolbox, alongside things like fog cannons and body cams. But let’s be clear - none of those scan your face and track you every time you walk through a door.
Across the ditch, Bunnings is being dragged through court for using this tech. The Australian privacy watchdog is doing its job. Ours just gave it a polite nod.
his is the normalisation of mass surveillance in everyday life. Once facial recognition becomes normal in supermarkets, it will spread. It’ll turn up in malls, petrol stations, public transport, schools and workplaces. You won’t be able to go anywhere without being scanned and watched.
The Privacy Commissioner is supposed to protect the public, not rubber-stamp tech that treats everyone like a potential criminal. A “cautious tick” isn’t good enough. We need a hard stop.
Facial recognition is not just a tool. It is the foundation of a future where privacy disappears and surveillance becomes a way of life. And the people in charge of guarding our rights just failed to stop it.
Your face is yours. Not theirs. Not the government’s. Not the supermarket’s. If we don’t speak up now, we’ll lose the right to simply exist in public without being watched.
And when that happens, we’ll know exactly who let it happen.
Matua Kahurangi is just a bloke sharing thoughts on New Zealand and the world beyond. No fluff, just honest takes. He blogs on https://matuakahurangi.com/ where this article was sourced.
15 comments:
I don't see the problem with this if it's clear, when we enter the store, that facial technology will apply. Then we have the choice whether we enter or not. Once we are inside, the store owner has the right to decide whether we are welcome and be aware of our movements. If someone visits my place, I certainly want to know who they are. Also, if somebody does something in public they can't expect privacy.
Having said that, I'm enjoying your posts Matua.
You’re already being watched. Nearly every where you go. Those images are already stored for future reference. Facial recognition is software that matches the stored image the next time you show up on camera. The surveillance society is here already.
Privacy is power, and “If we don’t speak up now, we’ll lose the right to simply exist in public without being watched”, and worse.
The AI control grid has begun:
https://gregreese.substack.com/p/ai-kill-and-control-system-by-palantir?
This Is What a Digital Coup Looks Like:
https://fritzfreud.substack.com/p/this-is-what-a-digital-coup-looks
We are surveilling everyone to catch a minority. The loss of individual privacy is a big price to pay. Many people simply don’t understand how easily such information can abused. Add in digital currency and just imagine how much info could be amassed on each and every one of us. Such info provides the opportunity, if not an invitation, to judge and control the populace. Imagine if Jacinda and co, with no doubt the best of intentions, had been able to utilise mass surveillance techniques during covid for example. Info is power and unfortunately power tends to corrupt. Our Privacy Commissioner is giving us poor value for our taxpayer dollars.
I think a better solution to the shoplifting problem that’s driving this in the first would be for the courts to severely punish shoplifters and treat shoplifting as a serious crime.
Any adult who lived through the last 5 years of ‘Democratic’ tyranny knows very well that the systems now being used or developed are not there just to pick up the occasional shoplifter. As Jabcinda said, a two tier system is inevitable, and guess who will find themselves on the bottom level. Our politicians no longer represent us, they represent themselves and any future threat to that nirvana will be rapidly extinguished. Population surveillance will be most useful indeed as an essential tool of our rapidly advancing Orwellian state.
Then we have the choice whether we enter or not
-------------
Not really. With the effective duopoly, in which virtually all supermarkets operate we have no choice as the alternative is starvation. While stores are privately owned, they exist to serve the public. If the store owner claims the right to capture and retain the image of my face during my visit, I should have the right to demand that it is deleted the moment I leave their premises.
People think its great, in China at an airport you look at the board to see where your flight goes from and it recognizes your face and pops up the info. Scary!
What the 'writer' fails to address is the cost to consumers of using real people to enforce security in smkts. Who would take on a security job anyway? The moderns, the Entitled Ones, can get extremely nasty and/or violent.
Cameras are a much cheaper option, but it's what is done with the images that may give cause for deep concern.
Hopefully the companies that collect and store the data will exercise the highest level of scrutiny of its employees.
Anon 9:43 - Jacinda was tracking you during covid using the location tracking on your cell phone.
All that nonsense about taking pix of barcodes!
As always, carrying a cell phone tells the Telcos where you are - they need to know to send calls and texts.
What a farce that was !
I refused to do it but Ardern had so much control over her sheeple, that they got angry with me for not complying.
Hmmm, she muttered, if they are that gullible, let's pretend that 3 Waters, seperate Health systems are good for them ........
Images must be stored forever, otherwise the system has no value.
For example, if your image is deleted when you leave a store, there is no record of you ever being there. If image is stored, they know you have been there before.
The same system will know what you bought, when and where your money came from.
This is tip of the iceberg stuff.
Where does the facial recognition system get your original photo from to match up with a profile? What if you are mis-identified? That will happen. How long does it keep knowing your face as it changes with age? How are identical twins or triplets treated? Won't the crims just wear a mask or put marks on their faces and wash them off later? If crims can't buy food what happens? MC
All these conspiracy theories!! If you've been caught being shoplifting, your image will be kept. What possible reason would the supermarket have to keep any other shoppers image on file. Can you imagine the size of the databanks that would be needed to keep all the images of supermarket shoppers permanently? Get over yourselves
To - " All and Sundry ", that is those who have posted a comment and will do so once they read the article- is that irrespective of
" any surveillance, that attempts to identify those who shop lift ", the NZ Police have made it clear they will not pursue any case where the value of any product taken is less that $100.00.
So those who have already stated " such incidents are a cost to the consumer ", they will continue to be so.
The sad downside of this, is that Shop Owners will tell you they are legally forbidden to intervene, to do so and the "punter[s]" get hurt then they will "scream about assault (with intent) " that will see those involved face a criminal conviction - if found guilty.
This information was presented by the Manager of a supermarket, where a shop lift incident took place, and they stood and watched, customers queried - why no intervention?, and what is stated above is what we were told.
Oh and it was not the first time that group had carried out such an action. If you feel revulsion, think of what staff in, especially supermarkets, feel - on a daily basis.
Mass surveillance is not going to lower crime or theft in the slightest.
Criminals are already walking away with arm loads of stolen items from supermarkets and retail stores and there's not one thing law abiding citizens can do.
The cops are completely useless about dealing with crime as their sole purpose is to generate income from dishing out fines.
Even if you are easily identifiable as a criminal and traced it doesn't matter...as godfellas might say...forget about it...
Post a Comment