##HTML_TAG_1## "Face Pass Payment": The Era When "Face" Becomes a Wallet - The Unerasable Risks Hidden in a Future Where You Buy a Cup of Coffee with Facial Recognition ##HTML_TAG_2##

Even if you forget your wallet or your smartphone is out of battery, it's not a problem.

Stand at the café register and look at the camera, or present your palm in front of the terminal. That's all it takes for identity verification to be completed, the coffee payment to be processed, and even store points to be automatically added.

Such shopping, reminiscent of a sci-fi movie, is on the verge of becoming a reality.

In Australia, major payment terminal company Verifone has announced the rollout of its next-generation terminal "Victa," which supports facial recognition and palm vein authentication. The biometric authentication feature is optional, and traditional payment methods such as cards, smartphones, and PINs can still be used. Those wishing to use it must register in advance through affiliated stores, banks, or digital wallets, and verify their identity by presenting their face or palm at the store.

At first glance, this appears to be a natural evolution of cashless payments.

However, behind this convenience, issues of a different nature than those of traditional credit card or smartphone payments are emerging.

"Card numbers can be changed. But you can't change your face."

The biggest point of contention regarding biometric authentication payments lies precisely here.

"The ultimate hands-free payment" without taking out a card or smartphone

Victa is equipped with a camera to read faces and functions to recognize palm veins, allowing it to verify registered users using biometric information.

What Verifone envisions is not simply replacing cards with faces for payment.

For example, when shopping at a supermarket, currently, you might need to open a points app, present your membership card, and then tap your smartphone or card, requiring multiple actions.

If biometric authentication, membership information, and payment information are linked, once a user is recognized, check-in to the points program and payment can be processed together. Victa is envisioned not only for payments but also for applications in loyalty programs, orders, and age verification.

For stores, the appeal is not just about "being able to check out a few seconds faster."

If customers who visit can be smoothly identified, there's no need to ask for membership numbers or email addresses. It could integrate payments and customer management, offering perks to regular customers and services linked to purchase history.

In other words, biometric authentication terminals can be "the new wallet" while also serving as a new digital ID gateway linking stores and individuals.

This is where the line between convenience and privacy is drawn.

"Not saving photos" doesn't solve the issue

Verifone explains that the use of biometric authentication is opt-in, and the biometric profiles registered are managed by the service providers with whom users registered, such as affiliated stores, banks, or digital wallets. Victa also emphasizes security measures such as encryption and tokenization.

The important point is that "whether or not photos are saved as they are" and "whether or not biometric information is saved" are not necessarily the same.

In facial recognition, a biometric template that quantifies facial features is generally created and matched with the registered template. Australia's information oversight body, OAIC, also describes facial recognition technology as extracting features from facial images to create and match biometric templates.

This template is not the original photo itself.

However, it remains crucial information for identifying individuals.

If a credit card number is leaked, it can be deactivated and a new number issued. If a password is leaked, it can be changed.

However, you cannot "change to a new one" for facial structure, fingerprints, or vein patterns.

Therefore, with biometric authentication, it's necessary to consider not only "preventing leaks" but also designing a system where, if authentication data is leaked, the template can be invalidated and reconstituted as new authentication information.

On social media, "scary" precedes "futuristic"

So, are consumers welcoming this future?

As far as can be seen from public social media posts, at least on Reddit shortly after the introduction of Victa was reported in New Zealand, the response was far from welcoming.

Posts included sentiments like "I'll keep using cards," "Why is this necessary?" and "Cash is better," along with strong rejection reactions calling it "dystopian." There were also comments jokingly questioning the accuracy of distinguishing twins and pointing out misjudgments in facial recognition. While this is not a public opinion poll but rather the reaction of a specific community, it provides insight into the psychological resistance to new technology.

On the other hand, the sentiment is slightly different on social media closer to the payment and FinTech industries.

On platforms like LinkedIn, while biometric authentication is praised as "technology that makes sci-fi a reality," opinions suggest that ultimately, what will determine its widespread adoption is not the technology's performance but consumer trust. While convenience is appreciated, there are also concerns about "what is being given up in exchange."

What's interesting here is that many of the opponents are not rejecting "biometric authentication itself."

Facial and fingerprint recognition on smartphones is already used daily by many people.

Yet, when it comes to facing a camera at a store, psychological resistance suddenly becomes stronger.

The difference likely stems from the perception of "who manages one's biometric information."

Japan is already a country where you can "pay with your face"

From Japan's perspective, viewing the Australian story as a distant future experiment is not entirely accurate.

At the Osaka-Kansai Expo in 2025, facial recognition payments linked with electronic money like "Myakupe!" were introduced. The Expo's official stance was to deploy one of the largest-scale facial recognition electronic money payments in the country, promoting the convenience of hands-free payments.

Moreover, Japan's shift to cashless payments is rapidly advancing.

According to the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, the cashless payment ratio in 2025 was 58.0%, with a transaction amount of 162.7 trillion yen. In Japan, once known as a "cash society," more than half of payments are now cashless.

From cash to credit cards.

From cards to smartphones.

And from smartphones to biometric information.

Given this trend, it's not surprising if payments using faces or palms spread to convenience stores, supermarkets, and restaurant chains in Japan.

In fact, in Japan, it aligns well with issues like aging and labor shortages.

If register operations are reduced and identity verification can be done without remembering membership numbers or passwords, it benefits both users and stores. For those not accustomed to smartphone operations, a system where payment is completed just by looking at the terminal might even be simpler than QR code payments.

The question is under what conditions we accept this convenience.

How facial and vein data is handled in Japan

Japan's Personal Information Protection Commission has indicated that codes converted to a level where registered facial appearances, DNA, fingerprints, and other biometric information can be used to identify specific individuals are treated as "personal identification codes." Data converted into a form that can be used for personal identification, such as facial features and finger veins, is not merely anonymous data.

Here, Japanese consumers should not only ask, "Are facial photos being saved?"

Who holds the authentication template?

For how many years is it stored?

Is it completely deleted upon withdrawal?

Is it used for purposes other than payment?

Is there a possibility of it being linked with other companies' services?

Without explanations on these points, it cannot be considered meaningful consent.

The spread of facial recognition payments will likely depend more on how clearly companies can explain these points than on the accuracy of the cameras.

Australia already has a critical view of facial recognition

Another reason this move is intriguing is that in Australia, the use of facial recognition by retailers has already become a significant privacy issue.

The OAIC treats facial images and biometric templates used for identity verification or automatic identification as information requiring high protection under the Privacy Act. It also requires companies introducing facial recognition in retail spaces to carefully consider legality, necessity, proportionality, and privacy impact in advance.

In the past, Australia's 7-Eleven faced privacy authority scrutiny for collecting facial images and other data through customer survey terminals.

That's why the voluntary participation aspect of Victa is strongly emphasized.

However, being opt-in alone may not be sufficient.

For example, if only users who choose facial recognition receive more points, or if not choosing facial recognition results in longer checkout times, it could create a situation where, in practice, users are encouraged to use it, even if it's formally voluntary.

Whether the "freedom not to use" truly remains is also crucial.

The biggest change is not "payment" but "being recognized"

The real impact of facial recognition payments may not be that you don't have to carry a wallet.

Until now, for stores to identify customers, they needed to have them present a points card or open an app.

In other words, customers actively declared, "I am a member."

If facial recognition becomes commonplace, this order will reverse.

Stores will be able to recognize users and then provide services.

Technologically, one can imagine a world where membership information is called up the moment you approach the register, and coupons based on past purchase history are displayed.

It's extremely convenient if you call it that.

On the other hand, the current sense of "being able to decide when you are recognized" will fade.

Once payment technology and marketing technology are linked, biometric authentication becomes more than just a payment method.

That's why clear boundaries, such as "information registered for payment authentication will not be used for in-store behavior analysis," become important.

Five conditions necessary for widespread adoption in Japan

If facial and palm vein payments are to become widespread in Japan, at least the following conditions are necessary.

First, it must be a clear opt-in.

It's important that users who do not register are not disadvantaged and that they can always choose alternative payment methods like cash, cards, or smartphones.

Second, the data manager should be clearly displayed.

Is it the terminal manufacturer, the retailer, the bank, or the payment service company? Consumers must be able to understand at a glance.

Third, make the deletion process easy.

If registration takes only a few seconds on a smartphone, but deletion requires submitting paperwork, it cannot be said that users truly have control.

Fourth, do not allow use for purposes other than the initial setting.

If facial information for payment is to be used for advertising, visit analysis, or surveillance, clear consent separate from payment should be sought.

Fifth, ensure that shopping is possible even if biometric authentication fails.

Device malfunctions, changes in appearance, injuries, and authentication errors are bound to happen. The more biometric authentication becomes an infrastructure of daily life, the more important it is to have alternative methods available.

It's not about "using your face" but "who to trust"

Biometric authentication payments will likely become increasingly user-friendly from a technical standpoint.

Authentication speed will increase, misrecognition will decrease, and terminal prices will drop.

However, that alone will not lead to widespread adoption.

One of the main reasons smartphone facial recognition has been accepted is not just because it's "convenient," but because users feel they have some control over the system within their own devices.

In-store biometric authentication payments require expanding that trust to stores, banks, payment companies, and system providers.

There is a significant psychological barrier here.

Is it necessary to register your face just to buy a cup of coffee?

Does saving a few seconds of taking out a smartphone balance with entrusting biometric information to a company's system?

On the other hand, if you can pay safely and instantly every day at places like your commute, convenience stores, company cafeteria, and stadiums, there will surely be people who use it simply because it's convenient.

Ultimately, what will determine the future of facial recognition payments is not "how excellent facial recognition technology is."

It's whether users can trust companies enough to feel comfortable entrusting their face.

Card numbers can be changed.

Smartphones can be replaced.

But faces and palms follow you for life.

A society where "your face becomes your wallet" is simultaneously a society where "you yourself become the authentication key."

That's why, if this technology is to become widespread in Japan, before competing on