Camera in Coles Checkout Machines?

[EEVblog]

I just noticed on the new NCR machines at my local Coles supermarket, seems to be a camera, why?
Don't recall if the old ones had them.
Even if not used, it would be a network connected machine and could be exploited.

[John B]

I wouldn't be surprised that any of the self serve checkouts have considerable surveillance. I would imagine that self serve is a weak spot in regards to stock loss, and that camera staring at you would give a pretty good mug shot.

[xrunner]

At the local Home Depot they not only do they have cameras they display the active video of you checking out on a little screen at each self checkout register. Just so you know who's Boss. 

[cdev]

You better watch out, you better not cry
You better not pout, I'm telling you why
Santa Claus is coming to town, mmm

He's making a list, he's checking it twice
He's gonna find out who's naughty or nice
Santa Claus is coming to town, yeah

He sees you when you're sleeping
He knows when you're awake
He knows if you've been bad or good
So be good for goodness sake

[Halcyon]

I just noticed on the new NCR machines at my local Coles supermarket, seems to be a camera, why?
Don't recall if the old ones had them.
Even if not used, it would be a network connected machine and could be exploited.

I think they've been a standard feature on most units, but are currently disabled. I wouldn't be surprised if there were plans to incorporate that into their CCTV network.

Actually only two months ago I wrote a University paper on weaknesses in point of sales systems. I made some interesting discoveries.

[beanflying]

Add a little facial recognition software link it to your credit card and the store 'loyalty card' (if you are dumb enough to have one) share a little data with anyone with the $$ and .....

Orwell got it wrong big brother is much more sinister, hidden in plainsight and devious than we think. It's OK I am wearing my tinfoil hat as I type this via a proxy server based on the far side of Mars

[Fraser]

It may be of interest that in the UK a certain brand of self service coffeee machine contains a camera that observes the customer. Some investigation revealed gat it is a analytics camera that analyses demographics. The software determines the age and sex of the customer but it supposedly does not store an image of the customer in order to avoid Data Protection issues. I also discovered a multimedia capability that provided sound effects of a busy coffee shop in the machine ! There was immediately the concern of the unit listening to customers as well as presenting them with silly coffee shop environs sound effects. The computer being used to control the machine was a standard Windows PC motherboard. I was trying to get the analytics and multimedia capability removed from a machine as it required the use of a network connection or wi-fi link ! The rental contract for the machine prohibited the disconnection of the network connection or disablement of the demographics camera ! I just banned the whole machine and told them to get one that was 'simple' with no analytics.

For years now some shops have employed Irisys intelligent thermal imaging people counters that can monitor footfall, checkout queue lengths and shoppers browsing habits (full breadcrumb trail and dwell monitoring). It is even possible to determine male or female from the customers walking gate.

Forget Big Brother..... he is just trying to fight crime and keep you safe....  it is the commercial users of surveillance technology you should be worried about ....... money corrupts !

Fraser

[SeanB]

Fraser, big and with a touch screen, and Greek named?  There is one at the local bank, and it has 2 cameras covering the machine from the bank itself. Good thing is they do not charge for the coffee from the machine, free for the customers and staff in the bank service areas, not in the branch itself.

[Fraser]

SeanB,

Yep, that is the one ..... I understand it is  called a virtual coffee shop and has a large display plus sound effects.

The unit turned out to be far more clever than I liked..... a virtual "I.O." In my realm of control ! No thanks ! It does not have a sign on it stating that it is observing you. It applies algorithms to the camera image of the customers face to determine their demographic but they claim the complete image is never kept. I was also concerned about the standard PC's vulnerability to hacking as the network connection was essential to the machines Demographic surveillance operations ! One simple 'fix' would be black or frosted tape over the camera but the contract forbids this action and the machine likely sends a fault code to HQ thinking the camera is faulty. As to audio recording, the unit is not equipped with a microphone as standard when I looked at it. It is sooooo simple to add one though.

Fraser

[LapTop006]

I just noticed on the new NCR machines at my local Coles supermarket, seems to be a camera, why?

Two obvious features would be to do image recognition of your veggies, or a video conference support so you need fewer local checkout people.

Of course whether any of that *works* is a separate matter.

I've seen what look like IR sensors on these before, and light sensors also make sense.

[Fraser]

It should be remembered that demographic and personal shopping habits are very important 'intelligence' in the world of marketing. Such information is worth a lot of money to the retail industry. The retailers want to know who buys what, when and where. There is also the issue of security, not just for petty theft, but also credit/debit card fraud. Just like on cashpoint machines. The user of a credit or debit card can be photographed by the on board camera as a record that they were the person who used the card at the location. Cameras are now commonplace for evidential purposes but it is when the marketing bods start using such to create a social profile for each customer that things can get a bit iffy. Marketing is not famous for its good morals !

Fraser

[Stray Electron]

At the local Home Depot they not only do they have cameras they display the active video of you checking out on a little screen at each self checkout register. Just so you know who's Boss. 

   The local Walmarts have cameras on every aisle and they also have a large display monitor in every aisle so that you can clearly see everything that the camera is recording. A blatantly obvious way to let all of the shoppers know that everything that they do is being watched and recorded.

[cdev]

People may notice that sometimes if you shop in physical stores just like when you are online, if you linger over some product in the store or pick it up to look at it a bit more closely, often you start seeing ads for it or a few days later you get an offer to buy it or something similar.  Thats unlikely to be a coincidence.

How is this done?

1.) Face recognition
2.) Bluetooth MAC address as unique identifier for you
3.) RFID analysis of loyalty card or other misc RFID containing stuff you carry.

[rdl]

In general, I don't really mind this kind of "spying". After all, I have entered their premises voluntarily and I feel the business owner has a right to keep an eye on things. I don't care if they try to "profile" me either. It's not too different from what a human employee could do. I think the same applies when going out in any public place. For the most part, I think it is to be expected.

If this type of activity tries to cross the threshold of my home or is used on a personal computing device of mine, then it becomes an invasion of personal privacy and that's where I draw the line.

[cdev]

This is sort of a benchmark application that I have been following and its remarkable how much the cost of a system capable of doing this has fallen in price in the last ten or fifteen years.

image recognition of your veggies.

They are totally there now. If you look at the computer science literature you will find many dozens - perhaps hundreds of papers on this that depict astonishing progress in machine vision and the rapid decline in the cost of hardware capable of doing it.

[cdev]

How do you feel about the use of face recognition, Bluetooth, cell phone mac addresses, GPS (when you view an ad, so they can prevent fraud against advertisers)  to track people who may be commercially relevant to customers of those companies? Companies aggregating that data. By looking at an ad, while using a cell phone, tablet or other device that includes built-in location tracking features, you often become trackable. If you take a picture, that picture likely includes meta data embedding the make and model and sometimes where it was taken.

For example, life and health insurance companies might be interested in how physically active people are so they could provide incentives to healthy customers and disincentives to unhealthy customers.

 If they were not able to do that the cost for the average customer (who is defined in health insurance-speak as somebody in their 20s with no treatable health conditions, even if that is not in fact the average customer in society) to only rise a tiny bit even as the cost for sick customers may need to rise very substantially in order for the system to remain a profitable investment. If they were unable to channel those costs to the sick exclusively, the overall increase would crowd out more and more other spending all across society unless changes to a non-profit healthcare system like Canada's which are forbidden by trade commitments were made, at tremendous cost to the taxpayers in sanctions - such as what happened to the US when it lost the US-Gambling WTO case with Antigua-Barbuda, conveniently establishing the legal precedent, except much larger, because the affected service sector would be a huge one. (Also it would require they change their entire philosophy, a change they would never be willing to make.)

Or where people go, that is information companies gladly pay for. Everything from the size and layout and location of the interior of peoples homes, to the places they spend their time, and who else is there, at the same time, it all might be helpful to marketing firms in estimating their income.

As was recently stated "what is good for the people is not necessarily what is good for Facebook".

For example, various promotions which (insert corporate name here)'s customers might run (the reasons the companies that sell them might pay FB for their data) would be wasted on the poor who would be unlikely to ever buy those products.

In general, I don't really mind this kind of "spying". After all, I have entered their premises voluntarily and I feel the business owner has a right to keep an eye on things. I don't care if they try to "profile" me either. It's not too different from what a human employee could do. I think the same applies when going out in any public place. For the most part, I think it is to be expected.

If this type of activity tries to cross the threshold of my home or is used on a personal computing device of mine, then it becomes an invasion of personal privacy and that's where I draw the line.

What if you gave them consent by clicking a yes button on a EULA when you signed up for some web site?

[Halcyon]

In general, I don't really mind this kind of "spying". After all, I have entered their premises voluntarily and I feel the business owner has a right to keep an eye on things. I don't care if they try to "profile" me either. It's not too different from what a human employee could do. I think the same applies when going out in any public place. For the most part, I think it is to be expected.

If this type of activity tries to cross the threshold of my home or is used on a personal computing device of mine, then it becomes an invasion of personal privacy and that's where I draw the line.

I have to agree with you. Of course I was given the choice when I entered a store, I would say no. But in a public place, just about anything is fair game. In my home its very very different. At least in public you can control how much data leaves your person or even feed false data into the system.

[cdev]

you could very carefully cut the PCB traces connecting the on board camera, microphone, Bluetooth adaptor, networking adaptor and GPS to the rest of the computer. With the camera and microphone the chance is this wouldnt cause problems but you should investigate what would happen with the other two and the GPS. Some aspects of a computer now - networking - might complain if it couldnt access the Internet or GPS. If you used a USB networking adapter instead of wifi you could control when it was connected to the net and unplug it when you didn't want it to be.

Its not just the apps - Every computing platform, both hardware and software has its own issues.

[rdl]

The last time I bought a phone was about three years ago. I wasn't forced to buy a smart phone, so I didn't. I think it has a camera, but I've never used it. It has no GPS and Bluetooth is disabled. It does do a pretty good job of allowing me to take and make voice calls, which is good since that's all I bought it for.

[cdev]

I was mostly trying to make the point that they are adding functions that people often don't want which cannot be turned off except perhaps in software.

 

[beanflying]

Forget Big Brother..... he is just trying to fight crime and keep you safe....  it is the commercial users of surveillance technology you should be worried about ....... money corrupts !

Fraser

Big Brother in this day and age includes corporates. Our local 'security' agencies be they the DSD in Australia or the NSA in the US or whatever your local equivalent may be are tied into either overtly or covertly into so many systems there is no real separation. So image capture, what was brought, when and who were you with are not just corporate information.

Currently our disfunctional federal parliment knowingly rammed very flawed legislation through on the last sitting day in a farce. We currently have no legal and secure way to send encrypted 'commercial' or any data in complete security done in the name of security https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2018-10-02/proposed-surveillance-laws-draw-international-criticism/10300170

If you were a foreign company trying to win an Australian Goverment contract for example then 'in the interests of National Security' your encrypted files etc are maybe fair game.

This is not tin foil hat this is Government overreach and is in force as of last Friday using corporate sourced information.

[Mr. Scram]

In general, I don't really mind this kind of "spying". After all, I have entered their premises voluntarily and I feel the business owner has a right to keep an eye on things. I don't care if they try to "profile" me either. It's not too different from what a human employee could do. I think the same applies when going out in any public place. For the most part, I think it is to be expected.

If this type of activity tries to cross the threshold of my home or is used on a personal computing device of mine, then it becomes an invasion of personal privacy and that's where I draw the line.

You have to understand that they can track you as a person, not just as a single visitor. Are you really comfortable with the digital version of someone following you around the store every time you visit, watching what you do and what you buy and logging it to a file under your name, with the option to sell it to anyone who pays?

In store tracking is a lot more involved than most people think.

[cdev]

This may not be a bug so much as a feature. They may have already agreed to open the contract bidding up and AU companies may be at a huge price disadvantage because of your wages in one way and may be protected from the worst of it by your minimum wages in another way.

Can you see how the below might influence the situation in a third way?

Currently our disfunctional federal parliment knowingly rammed very flawed legislation through on the last sitting day in a farce. We currently have no legal and secure way to send encrypted 'commercial' or any data in complete security done in the name of security https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2018-10-02/proposed-surveillance-laws-draw-international-criticism/10300170

If you were a foreign company trying to win an Australian Goverment contract for example then 'in the interests of National Security' your encrypted files etc are maybe fair game.

This is not tin foil hat this is Government overreach and is in force as of last Friday using corporate sourced information.

[coppercone2]

its security theater because they think they can catch someone buying 4 donuts for the price of 2.

they keepin ya slick

you should put some googly eyes on it.

[beanflying]

This may not be a bug so much as a feature. They may have already agreed to open the contract bidding up and AU companies may be at a huge price disadvantage because of your wages in one way and may be protected from the worst of it by your minimum wages in another way.

Can you see how the below might influence the situation in a third way?

Getting a Bit OT sorry all. In cases like our recent Submarine bidding I am very sure there was encrypted data being used by all sides and the argument could be now put by our Australian Government for passing that data on if transmitted by corporate entities or services. There was in this case no direct Australian bid and other than contract or sub contract manufacture later nothing to be gained in terms of jobs. The question would no be how would those bidders now view their data security and could our Government extract commercial advantage from information gained? The simple answer is - Yes. Does it involve National Security - Yes. Could you find a Judge prepared to sign off on it - Most Likely. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collins-class_submarine_replacement_project

The point is I guess that as data and information gets merged, interpreted and used or misused by legal, quasi legal or even illegal means then there is reasons for concern for basic privacy of the individual or company. We should remain concerned about anything that intrudes into these.