Controversial devices: Filming with smart glasses is not allowed in most cases

According to the Hamburg data protection supervisory authority, filming and photographing people with Meta smart glasses is not permitted in most cases. This is the result of a corresponding test report that the authority published on Thursday.

In it, the data protection officers reject the very light-hearted use of the recording function of these glasses in public. In practice, those filmed in these situations do not have the opportunity to give informed consent to the recordings, according to the report. It would be more possible to use it at home in the presence of people who belong to close friends and family.

Smart glasses like those from Meta have been criticized in Europe for several months: They allow their wearers to film and take photos largely unnoticed. An LED that lights up when recording should signal that recording mode is activated. But the Hamburg data protection officers note that this LED is “only perceptible to a limited extent, depending on the distance, viewing angle and lighting conditions”. Simply lighting up the LED alone is not enough to adequately inform those affected about data processing. Anyone who films or takes photos with glasses has to do more – for example, address those affected.

There is also another problem: If the LED light is off, that does not necessarily mean that the camera is not recording. The data protection officers criticize that “the possibility of the LED being easily manipulated by covering it with dark foil has not been noticeably eliminated.”

For its report, the authority examined the “Ray-Ban Meta Wayfarer (Gen 1)” model. The experts examined the structure of the associated app, recorded its data transmissions, finally dismantled the glasses and analyzed the components. Some surprising things also came to light: For example, the report states that tables have already been created in the software that are apparently intended to be used to evaluate facial recognition. However, these are still empty, so it can be assumed that facial recognition is not yet taking place.

The authors make it clear: Private individuals are also subject to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) when using the glasses. The household exception provided for in the law only applies if close friends or family are filmed and if “no professional or commercial purposes are pursued and the data is not made accessible beyond this group”.

The Hamburg data protection authority is not the only one to point out problems with the glasses. The organization HateAid already considers the distribution to be a criminal offense and has filed a complaint against Meta, the manufacturers and several optics retail chains. Some places are already restricting their use: the Norwegian capital Oslo has banned smart glasses in its schools. Hamburg is planning a ban in municipal pools and local public transport.

In a survey by the digital association Bitkom in August, 76 percent of respondents said they did not want to be filmed with smart glasses. 62 percent would not let a visitor into the house.

Meta explains in an FAQ on the topic that the camera function is automatically deactivated if the LED is blocked. However, this does not seem to work reliably in practice. “We are constantly working to improve our ability to detect coverage,” the group continues.

As a supervisory authority, the Federal Network Agency has so far seen no reason to prohibit manufacturers and sellers of smart glasses that have a glowing LED indicating the recording from selling. However, operation with a deactivated or covered LED is prohibited.