VISG $3.90 NEWS:Interest in face scanning grows after attacks
By Andy Sullivan
WASHINGTON, Sept 18 (Reuters) - After nine months of intense scrutiny by lawmakers and privacy hawks, makers of controversial facial-surveillance technology have found themselves struggling to meet commercial demand in the wake of last week's deadly attacks.
Executives of Visionics Corp (NasdaqNM:VSNX - news). and Viisage Technology Inc., (NasdaqNM:VISG - news) which both make systems that cross-check surveillance-camera footage with criminal mugshots, say they have been flooded with calls and e-mails from prospective clients, including the federal government, since hijacked jetliners crashed into the World Trade Center, the U.S. Pentagon and the Pennsylvania countryside last Tuesday.
Investors have shown enthusiasm as well. On Monday, the first day of trading since the attacks, Visionics shares rose 93 percent to $8.25 and Viisage shares rose 142 percent to $4.70.
Executives say their systems could have saved lives had they been in place at airports, border crossings and other checkpoints last Tuesday.
``Clearly this technology could have made a real difference had it been deployed,'' said Viisage CEO Tom Colatosti, who offered his technology to the FBI free of charge Tuesday.
Privacy advocates worry that the systems may be rushed into place across the country without a thorough examination of their effectiveness and capabilities.
Clear guidelines need to be established, they say, to prevent the tracking of innocent individuals and other abuses.
``Surveillance is absolutely critical in this society. I want to know that it's being used appropriately,'' said Larry Ponemon of the Privacy Council.
But facial-surveillance firms say they have been sidetracked by the privacy question when security is the overriding concern.
``Right now what we need to do is build our defenses, as we need to protect innocent lives and prevent this from happening again,'' said Visionics CEO Joseph Attick.
'SNOOPER' BOWL
Face-scanning technology first came to U.S. public attention in February, when police in Tampa, Florida, used a Viisage system to check the faces of sports fans attending the Super Bowl against a criminal database.
Tampa police later installed a Visionics system on the streets of the Ybor City nightlife district to monitor petty crime.
Both moves drew widespread protest from civil-liberties groups and lawmakers, who said the surveillance invaded the privacy of ordinary citizens and could be easily abused.
Visionics chief executive Joseph Attick in August called on the U.S. government to pass a law that would prevent users from tracking ordinary citizens and limit what information could be stored in its computer database.
House Majority leader Dick Armey said that Congress would take up the issue in the fall, but a spokesman said that the attacks have thrown the Congressional schedule into doubt.
Attick and Colatosti, who also supports federal legislation, said they have adopted guidelines of their own. Attick said his company monitors clients' use of its product to make sure they limit what information may be stored in the database and does not track ordinary citizens.
Colatosti said his firm will not contract in situations it considers invasive -- like monitoring public streets in Tampa, an offer he says Viisage turned down.
``What you want to be able to do is see if a terrorist is coming into a high-risk facility. What you don't want to be doing is spying,'' he said.
But monitoring public streets may not be spying, as U.S. law provides no privacy protections for people in public places, said John Woodward, a senior policy analyst at the defense-oriented think tank RAND.
Instead, people should worry about what types of information are included in the database, he said.
``Do we want to have every drunken driver in America? Do we want to install facial recognition in our libraries?'' Woodward said.
Effectiveness is another concern, privacy experts said, especially the possibility of creating ``false matches'' -- or misidentifying innocent citizens as criminals. Tampa police located 19 suspected criminals at the Super Bowl but made no arrests, and have so far made no arrests from the street-level system.
``Does it work as they describe it, or do they have glitches that will mischaracterize people?'' said Evan Hendricks, editor and publisher of the Privacy Times newsletter. ``They should probably reach out and discuss these issues with privacy groups.''
But Colatosti said enough time has been spent discussing privacy risks.
``I am frustrated and, in fact, feel guilty that we allowed all of this dialogue around this red herring called privacy to get in the way of deployment,'' he said. |
