"This could assist in age verification, for example by preventing a minor from using theirparent's driver's licence to circumvent age verification controls," a discussion paper released by the Department of Home Affairs, headed by Minister Peter Dutton.
The paper adds, "Whilst they are primarily designed to prevent identity crime, Home Affairs would support the increased use of the Document and Face Verification Services across the Australian economy to strengthen age verification processes."
The effort echoes a move by Britain — which was ultimately dropped — to begin requiring commercial providers of online pornography to verify that their users are 18 or over. The initiative spurred widespread privacy complaints, though the government cited technical gaps that allowed users to bypass verification methods and concerns over cyberattacks in shelving the plan.
Under the British initiative, users would have been required to prove their age to third-party verification services using traditional IDs or verified cards purchased from retailers. In Australia, the Department of Home Affairs has offered a different solution, saying it can provide a "suite of identity matching services."
Could Aussies be foreced to scan their faces before viewing online porn? That's the proposal mooted by Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton. Photo / Getty
New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties chairman Thomas Beagle declined to give a verdict on Australia's mooted face-recognition scheme, saying, "The NZCCL generally doesn't comment on foreign politics - even for ideas as technologically weird as this."
But other experts say face recogniton faces several challenges, from privacy intrusion to false matches.
Dutton's proposal seems some distance from reality, regardless.
Beyond practical and technical hurdles, a parliamentary committee for intelligence and security last week rejected a bill that would establish a central identity database, because it could lead to mass surveillance and "does not adequately incorporate enough detail", according to committee chairman Andrew Hastie.
But it follows a trend toward Big Brother-ish legislation across the Tasman.
In recent years, Australian governments on both sides of the aisle have passed dozens of national security laws that have increased law enforcement powers and, critics say, encroached on the rights of citizens.
Two years ago, the government passed a metadata retention law that allows it to collect and store for two years information on phone calls and text messages, including the identity of participants and the duration of the communication.
And late last year it passed a bill that would require technology companies to provide law enforcement and security agencies with access to encrypted communications.
