While US market is being sensitive about cybersecurity through their popular camera products, European countries and the UK are preparing for the new privacy regulation to apply in two months’ time. But how would these challenges affect the global security market? What are the main problems in it for the manufacturers? What should investors in security industry look at right now?

We’ve all recently heard about acquisitions of market-leading companies by technological ‘monsters’ which have little experience in video security industry. Most of the market players would have thought: why don’t they give up when their businesses have just become ‘money-making machines’?

One obvious potential may be that they were not prepared for the changes that are only a few months away. They have ‘milked their cow’ for as long as they could, and now it’s time to slaughter the cow and sell the meat. For instance, very few market players prepared for the upcoming General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), that are being applied to their key markets.

Manual GDPR functions will be still cheap, but you won’t be able to control massive amounts of data with them - though automated GDPR features may become very costly

Improved quality for CCTV owners

Development that could fix the ‘GDPR issue’ for a manufacturer may take 2-3 years and will require millions invested. As an alternative, they would have OEMed (Original Equipment Manufacturer) the required technology from competitive manufacturers. They probably made the decision to escape a few years back or just admitted the changes too late, and thus had to leave.

Meanwhile, GDPR looks like a logical step towards better human rights and privacy guarantees in Europe. Presumably, everybody wants to have a right to be forgotten or at least hidden in someone else’s footage. We never know how CCTV owners may use this information and how it would affect us.

No paranoia, it just doesn’t feel very comfortable if you are watched and stored, not knowing when and where. Life quality would improve much if people could have at least some control over it. Logically, considering this, GDPR is a clever and well-thought-out improvement. However, don’t forget that government will still have access to full storage.

Encrypted personal data

Having all personal data encrypted may let us get rid of some undesirable advertising and spam. The remarkable fact is that GDPR doesn’t mention any encryption standard to be used. This looks strange in view of the reliability of the applied regulation, though potentially leaves a ‘backdoor’ for local EU governments, so they may decide which encryption algorithm works best for them. Hopefully, they won’t ask for too many different ones, as it could be difficult to implement in every system that requires it.

 

GDPR features may become very costly as they require complex video analysis and even deep learning
Development that could fix the ‘GDPR issue’ for a manufacturer may take 2-3 years and will require millions invested


How about low-cost products, you may ask? Will the prices grow as GDPR starts? Most probably manual GDPR functions will be still cheap or free, but you won’t be able to control massive amounts of data with them - though automated GDPR features may become very costly as they require complex video analysis and even deep learning. It means that only those products which have effective analytics and neural engines will be desirable for the customers. Hence, smaller manufacturers would have a chance to OEM some of these technologies to stay in the EU market.

However, all of this will increase the prices in May’18. None of the manufacturers would give away analytic features. Prepare to pay for them if you have more than a hundred cameras. The more cameras you have the more features you need pay for, so overall security system cost may grow in geometrical progression.

Restricted footage access policies

But does privacy conflict with security? What if someone asks to be forgotten and then commits a crime? Here, another challenge comes in. Footage has to be available for police access only. So, you can just remove the part of your video archive in which privacy is requested by a citizen. You need to hide it from VMS/NVR users, but must be able to show in case the police ask for it.

Let’s imagine that instantly all manufacturers have managed to sort out the GDPR problem. Though doesn’t it look ridiculous to be able to hide faces in footage in Europe while US experts report, and others confirm massive backdoor issues with market-leading camera brands? Or is it just another infowar against successful market players? Unfortunately, yes, the backdoors exist and can be self-proven by following instructions that are publicly available online.

The problem is not being spied on; the problem is low cost. Safe products cost more. The choice is ours

Classification of security products

Conspiracy supporters claim that ‘The Product for them is our personal data!’ and ‘it’s all done only to collect data for their machine learning and learning our behavior’. Let’s be logical, would we expect low-cost products to be secure enough? Obviously, the problem is not being spied on; the problem is low cost. Safe products cost more. The choice is ours.

There must be some international – presumably approved by UN – certification for security products in critical and public infrastructure. Otherwise, each country should certify security products in order to avoid privacy or safety issues for their citizens. At the same time, all end users of critical and public security systems should be trained on how to use security products. Classification of security products for ‘hackability’ would be also great to have so we would know what we are paying and how much.

Download PDF version

Author profile

Yury Akhmetov Business Development Director, AxxonSoft

In case you missed it

What characteristics do salespeople require in the physical security industry?
What characteristics do salespeople require in the physical security industry?

A basic tenet of sales is ABC – always be closing. But it's a principle that most professional salespeople would say oversimplifies the process. Especially in a sophisticated, high-tech market such as physical security, the required sales skills are much more involved and nuanced. We asked this week's Expert Panel Roundtable: What unique characteristics are required of salespeople in the arena of physical security systems?

Can microchip implants replace plastic cards in modern access control?
Can microchip implants replace plastic cards in modern access control?

A futuristic alternative to plastic cards for access control and other applications is being considered by some corporate users in Sweden and the United Kingdom. The idea involves using a microchip device implanted into a user’s hand. About the size of a grain of rice and provided by Swedish company Biohax, the tiny device employs passive near field communication (NFC) to interface with a user’s digital environment. Access control is just one application for the device, which can be deployed in lieu of a smart card in numerous uses. Biohax says more than 4,000 individuals have implanted the device. Using the device for corporate employees Every user is given plenty of information to make an informed decision whether they want to use the deviceCurrently Biohax is having dialogue with curious corporate customers about using the device for their employees. “It’s a dialogue, not Big Brother planning to chip every employee they have,” says Jowan Österlund, CEO at Biohax. Every user is given plenty of information to make an informed decision whether they want to use the device. Data capture form to appear here! “Proof of concept” demonstrations have been conducted at several companies, including Tui, a travel company in Sweden that uses the device for access management, ID management, printing, gym access and self-checkout in the cafeteria. Biohax is also having dialogue with some big companies in the United Kingdom, including legal and financial firms. Österlund aims to have a full working system in place in the next year or so. A Swedish rail company accepts the implanted chip in lieu of a paper train ticket. They accept existing implants but are not offering to implant the chips. Österlund says his company currently has no plans to enter the U.S. market. The device is large enough to locate easily and extract if needed, and small enough to be unobtrusive Access control credential The device is inserted/injected below the skin between the index finger and the thumb. The circuitry has a 10-year lifespan. The device is large enough to locate easily and extract if needed, and small enough to be unobtrusive. The only risk is the possibility of infection, which is true anytime the skin is pierced, and the risk is mitigated by employing health professionals to inject the chip. Use of the device as an access control credential or any other function is offered as a voluntary option; any requirement by an employer to inject the device would be illegal, says Österlund. It’s a convenient choice that is made “based on a well-informed decision by the customer.” Aversion to needles, for example, would make some users squeamish to implant the device. More education of users helps to allay any concerns: Some 10% of employees typically would agree quickly to the system, but a larger group of 50% to 60% are likely to agree over time as they get more comfortable with the idea and understand the convenience, says Österlund. Protection of information The passive device does not actively send out any signals as you walk. It is only powered up by a reader if a user has access rightsIn terms of privacy concerns, information contained on the device is in physical form and is protected. The passive device does not actively send out any signals as you walk. There is no battery. It is only powered up by a reader if a user has access rights. With use of the device being discussed in the United Kingdom, there has been some backlash. For example, Frances O’Grady, general secretary of the Trades Union Congress (TUC), has said: “Microchipping would give bosses even more power and control over their workers.” A big misconception is that the chip is a tracking device, says Österlund. It isn’t. “We love people to get informed,” says Österlund. “If they’re scared or apprehensive, they can just read up. It’s not used to control you – it’s used to give you control.”

Ethical consumption: should you buy security products ‘Made in China’?
Ethical consumption: should you buy security products ‘Made in China’?

Should ‘Made in China’ be seen as a negative in security systems and products? It’s an important and complex issue that merits a more detailed response than my recent comment in the Expert Panel Roundtable. For me, there are two sides of the answer to this question: Buying products that have certain negative attributes that are not in alignment with some part of a belief system or company mandate. Buying products that do not perform as advertised or do something that is unacceptable. For integrators and end users making the buying decisions, the drive to purchase products may not be based on either aspect and instead on the product that can do the best job for their business. But for others, a greater emphasis on the ethical implications of purchasing decisions drives decision-making. What is ethical consumption? Ethical consumption is a type of consumer activism that is based on the concept of ‘positive buying’ in that ethical products are favouredEthical consumption — often called ethical consumerism — is a type of consumer activism that is based on the concept of ‘positive buying’ in that ethical products are favoured, and products that are ethically questionable may be met with a ‘moral boycott’. This can be as simple as only buying organic produce or as complex as boycotting products made in a totalitarian regime that doesn't offer its citizens the same freedoms that we enjoy in the United States. Consider the goals of the Boston Tea Party or the National Consumers League (NCL), which was formed to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. Some examples of considerations behind ethical consumption include fair trade, treatment of workers, genetic modification, locally made and processed goods, union-made products and services, humane animal treatment, and in general, labour issues and manufacturing practices that take these factors into account. Increase in ethical consumption The numbers show that ethical consumption is on the rise. In a 2017 study by Unilever, 33 percent of consumers reported choosing to buy and support brands that they believe are doing social or environmental good. In the same study, 53 percent of shoppers in the United Kingdom and 78 percent in the United States said they feel better when they buy products that are ‘sustainably’ produced. There’s clear evidence that products from some Chinese companies suffer from cybersecurity vulnerabilities Though the aforementioned question that sparked this conversation centres around concerns with products made in China, there are many other countries where, for example, governments/dictators are extremely repressive to all or parts of their populations, whose products, such as oil, diamonds, minerals, etc., we happily consume. There are also a number of countries that are a threat in terms of cybersecurity. It may be naive and simplistic to single out Chinese manufacturers. Impact on physical security products Product buying decisions based on factors other than product functionality, quality and price are also starting to permeate the security marketplace. While this hasn't been a large focus area from the business-to-business consumption side, it's something that should be considered for commercial security products for a variety of reasons. Hardware hacks are more difficult to pull off and potentially more devastating" There’s clear evidence that products from some Chinese companies suffer from cybersecurity vulnerabilities. Last fall, 30 U.S. companies, including Apple and Amazon, were potentially compromised when it was discovered that a tiny microchip in the motherboard of servers built in China that weren't a part of the original specification. According to a Bloomberg report, “This attack was something graver than the software-based incidents the world has grown accustomed to seeing. Hardware hacks are more difficult to pull off and potentially more devastating, promising the kind of long-term, stealth access that spy agencies are willing to invest millions of dollars and many years to get.” This, along with many other incidents, are changing the considerations behind purchasing decisions even in the physical security industry. Given that physical security products in general have been lax on cybersecurity, this is a welcome change. Combating tech-specific threats In early January, members of the U.S. Senate introduced bipartisan legislation to help combat tech-specific threats to national security posed by foreign actors and ensure U.S. technological supremacy by improving interagency coordination across the U.S. government. The bill creates the Office of Critical Technologies & Security at the White House, an indication that this issue is of critical importance to a number of players across the tech sector. Members of the U.S. Senate introduced bipartisan legislation to help combat tech-specific threats to national security posed by foreign actors To address a significant number of concerns around ethical production, there are certifications such as ISO 26000 which provides guidance on social responsibility by addressing accountability, transparency, ethical behaviour, respect for stakeholder interests, respect for rule of law, respect for international norms of behaviour and respect for human rights. While still emerging within physical security, companies that adhere to these and other standards do exist in the marketplace. Not buying products vulnerable to cyberattacks It may be counter-productive, even irresponsible, to brand all products from an entire country as unfit for purchasing. Some manufacturers’ products may be ethically questionable, or more vulnerable to cyberattacks than others; so not buying products made by those companies would make sense. The physical security industry might be playing a bit of catch up on this front, but I think we're beginning to see a shift toward this kind of responsible buying behaviour.