Canada's Police Service Admits to Using Facial Recognition -- After Previously Denying It

Canada's federal and national police service the RCMP denied it was using facial recognition technology just a few weeks ago. But now long-time Slashdot reader satanicat quotes the CBC: [L]ast week, as the debate over the ethics of Clearview AI's facial recognition technology was heating up and following reports the company's client list had been hacked, the RCMP issued a statement confirming it had been using the technology for at least the previous four months. "The discrepancy is the result of an error on our part," said spokesperson Catherine Fortin in an email late Wednesday...

On Thursday, the force said its child exploitation unit has used the technology, resulting in the rescue of two children, for about four months. It's also acknowledged "a few units in the RCMP" are using the controversial tech to "enhance criminal investigations."

"Outside of use of the application in child sexual exploitation cases, usage has been explored on a very limited trial basis," said Fortin Wednesday, adding that RCMP headquarters is still confirming with all its divisions about what units have been using Clearview AI.

Re:

[Whispered_Name]

Competent national gov't.s can get away with secrecy for a long time, e.g., the CIA-operated firm Crypto AG (http://bit.ly/2PTup40). But using a vendor (a) whose product is despised by hackers that (b) doesn't have competent cybersecurity itself is just asking for trouble.

Re:

[infolation]

I wish that, as a child, every time I got caught lying by my parents I could have used the phrase "The discrepancy is the result of an error on my part"

Re:

[ShanghaiBill]

The only error was thinking you wouldn't get caught lying to the people you serve.

Don't attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by incompetence.

In large bureaucracies, people often have no idea what is going on in other information silos.

The spokesperson claiming they weren't using facial recognition should have done some deeper fact-checking, but likely thought they were telling the truth at the time.

Re: An error?

[astrofurter]

Dude, haven't you heard? Hanlon's Razor is deprecated. In $current_year it has been superceded by the Surveillance Valley Razor:

"Never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by malice."

Python

[guygo]

"Oh no no no no... we'd NEVER do anything like... Well, maybe we did." It's a bad Monty Python skit come to life.

Re:

[93 Escort Wagon]

Well, what they said was “okay, maybe we did... but we didn’t do it much and of course it was for the children”.

I don’t think even Python was ever that cynical.

Re:

[ShanghaiBill]

of course it was for the children”.

Unless they can point to specific indictments, I would not believe their claim that "children were saved".

Re:

[rtb61]

The real reason why they lied, so that Canadians et at would keep putting their images up on social media so that the authorities could run facial recognition on them to track down criminals, ones on the run and the ones captured on security cameras and of course witness testimony. If they talked about the dopey criminals would finally wake up and stop putting their images up on social media for the authorities to run facial recognition against them all.

They of course will tie into security cameras, the be

Re:

[PPH]

Dinsdale? Dinsdale?

Re:

[slazzy]

It's not uncommon for large organizations to not fully know what the thousands of other members are doing. I agree the RCMP should have have a policy for this that they must follow.

Re:

[guygo]

It is also not uncommon for competent organizations to have a single voice with which to speak to the public, a voice that checks on the veracity of what they are about to state BEFORE they state it. But I guess that's asking a lot these days...

Shady Business

[BCBuddy]

It would be nice if you could tell whether the officer in question was a good cop or a bad cop. Given all the scandalous behaviour of the RCMP in B.C. this is no longer the case. I should not feel nervous around a group that has been sworn to serve and protect the citizens of Canada but that is an unfortunate truth fo myself and, I suppose, many others as well. When our police force can no longer be expected to hold themselves to a higher standard than the criminals they say they are fighting every day, we

Re: Shady Business

[satanicat]

I agree with everything your saying. I am coming from the far east of the country in the maritimes, it's nothing at all like how folks are dealing with, but its every bit as concerning.
I'm not convinced the RCMP as an organization is solely to blame, things have been getting a bit shady (at least by my short recollection) especially since the last part of Harper. And especially in relation to the oil business.
I didnt post this because of the oil business, or because of things happening out west, it just f

Re:

[AHuxley]

Just dont try to publish a book about politics in Canada.

standard operating procedure

[astrofurter]

Wannabe-gestapo law enforcers sure do love lying to the public...

It's the lying that is the bigger problem

[DutchUncle]

Yes, facial recognition is abused, and not always correct, and all the other bad things. But that's not the core problem here. Sir Robert Peel said in 1829, ".The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police existence, actions, behavior and the ability of the police to secure and maintain public respect." That includes trust. If the RCMP had said something along the lines of "We use all tools available, confirming and cross-checking to ensure the quality and