Face recognition technologies: regulation problems in Ukraine
Hennadii Androshchuk,Liudmyla Rabotiahova
DOI: https://doi.org/10.33731/12022.258192
2022-06-03
Theory and Practice of Intellectual Property
Abstract:Keywords: biometric identification, personal data, video monitoring, facial recognition technology, artificial intelligence
The technological trends of biometric technologies, the evolution of facial recognition technology (FRT), the algorithm of FRT, and the FRT scope, development and regulation are studied. The Kyiv School of Image Recognition developments and the legal basis for the application of FRT in Ukraine are analyzed, and the author’s definition of FRT used in real-time to identify, authenticate, and verify a person as a biometric system controlled by artificial intelligence (AI) is presented.The state of compliance with the legislation requirements on personal data protection in Ukraine, their legal protection during video surveillance, social effect (almost 30% of crimes are solved applying FRT, in areas where automatic video recording systemsare installed, the number of deaths has decreased by three times), reforms of the national personal data protection system is studied. Risks and challenges arising from the lack of proper regulation of FRT in Ukraine are identified, and their solutionsare suggested. It is concluded that the FRT is becoming an instrument of geopolitical influence. The field of AI inevitably becomes a sphere of both scientific and technological competition as well as military and political confrontation.The application of biometric technologies is now trending. It provides access to workplaces and network resources, protection of information, access to specific resources and security at airports. For example, e-business and e-state affairs operationsare only possible after following specific personal identification procedures. Biometric technologies are currently used in banking security, investment and other financialtransactions, as well as in retail, law enforcement, health care and social services.It should be noted that there are two vectors of FRT development in the world. The totalitarian path of mass surveillance, accompanied by equally active manipulation and abuse, and the democratic one, offering an application of FRT as an instrument to prevent the violation of fundamental human rights. At the same time, no one demands to abandon FRT completely. It is a question of assessing the risk of its impact on people’s lives. The remote biometric identification, in which the AI can contributeto unprecedented change, bears an extremely high risk of profound and undemocratic interference in people’s privacy. Specific ways of using technology can benefit society and individuals, while others may have negative consequences. For FRT to be used to benefit and serve people, there are social and legal, primarily in the personal data protection system, and ethical norms.