Brazil proved throughout the years to often lead innovation, especially with regards to new technology. This is evident in the widespread adoption of facial recognition, which is already used in day-to-day life for access to residential buildings, gyms, and universities. In the past two years, this trend expanded to football and the live entertainment industry.
The main driver has been frequent fan clashes and security breaches, such as the incident in December 2024 at Arena MRV, where fans threw a bomb onto the field, injuring a photographer. To address this long-standing issue, the government introduced the General Sports Law (No. 14,597/2023), a new regulation mandating facial recognition for stadium entry at all venues with a capacity exceeding 20,000 spectators.
Pioneering clubs leading the way
Early adopters Palmeiras and Atlético Paranaense have shown proving that biometric ticketing works. Both clubs have reported zero security breaches recognizing extra benefits such as faster stadium entry, with up to 20 people per minute passing through a single turnstile. Fans now receive personalized, non-transferable tickets, eliminating illegal resales and ensuring that all ticket revenue stays with the club.
Requiring fan verification has also given clubs better insights into their supporters. This has allowed them to introduce tiered membership systems where fans pay a monthly subscription for a specific tier. This grants them the opportunity but not the guarantee to purchase tickets. As more clubs adopted this model last year, revenue from fan subscriptions grew by 72 percent, reaching 705 million Brazilian reals.
Although Brazil’s quick adoption of biometric ticketing is fascinating, there are still several issues. In a recent article, the National Data Protection Authority (ANPD) has flagged 23 clubs for potentially failing to meet biometric data security standards. This may shed a bad light on the technology itself. When clubs rush biometric ticketing without prioritizing data privacy, they expose sensitive data, face legal issues, and damage fan trust.
So, what are the criteria to implement biometric ticketing right?
Two essentials for safe implementation of biometric ticketing
To guarantee that biometric ticketing fulfills the expected benefits, clubs must focus on two key factors:
1. Using only trusted and independently evaluated technology
Not every biometric algorithm is reliable. Some perform well in controlled environments but fail to maintain accuracy or fairness in real-world conditions. To avoid these risks, clubs must choose technology that meets global standards.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) provides the only internationally recognized benchmark for evaluating biometric technology. Their assessments measure accuracy, speed, and demographic biases across various algorithms. If a biometric provider isn’t listed in NIST evaluations, it either fails to meet industry standards or doesn’t own its technology outright. Both are major red flags that limit future development.
If a company isn’t on this list, don’t consider them. Here’s why:
- Struggles with large crowds – mediocre algorithms fail during peak entry times, causing delays and frustration.
- Fairness and accuracy concerns – subpar algorithms often have higher error rates and demographic biases.
- Security risks – inferior technology may struggle to detect fake IDs or spoofing attempts, compromising stadium safety.
2. Ensuring strong biometric data security measures
For biometric ticketing to be effective, clubs must not only use the right technology but also implement strong biometric data security at every stage. Misused biometric information leads to legal troubles, privacy violations, and a loss of fan trust. In order to prevent this, clubs must follow strict security protocols covering data collection, storage, and encryption.
Use data minimization principles
To verify a fan remotely, they must first capture an image of their identity document, followed by a selfie. This process ensures the ticket links to a real person who is physically present at the time of purchase. However, clubs need to be mindful of the data they collect and store.
For instance, clubs may require a name, date of birth, and document number to identify banned individuals. They might also need the document’s expiration date to request re-verification when needed. Lastly, the country of issuance can help restrict away fans from attending high-risk matches when required.
However, saving raw document images, home addresses, or other irrelevant personal information is both unnecessary and risky. Holding onto excessive data increases privacy risks, legal exposure, and potential misuse while adding no real value.
By limiting data collection to only what is essential and ensuring automatic deletion of non-essential information, clubs improve biometric data security, ensure regulatory compliance, and build fan trust.
Process only biometric templates, not raw face images
A biometric template is a mathematical representation of a face, simple numbers, and letters compared to an actual picture. It has no value other than the authentication process. Besides, you can’t convert it back into a face like you can with a basic photo.
Processing and storing raw images is a major security risk. Biometric templates, on the other hand, are encrypted and irreversible. When raw images leak, unauthorized parties can exploit them for tracking, commit identity fraud, or engage in government surveillance.
For this reason, football clubs and event organizers must require their biometric software providers to use templates instead of storing raw images and should always confirm that the provider follows this approach when selecting one.
Pseudoanymize all collected personal data
To strengthen biometric data security, clubs must ensure that sensitive fan data remains pseudonymized. What does this mean? Simply put, biometric templates and personal information should be stored in separate databases linked by a unique identifier.
Clubs don’t actually need access to raw biometric data, only the verification result. Besides, clubs should only get the information required to execute admission and security checks. Although clubs own all the data, the biometric provider, who has more strict data protection measures in place, should store it. In addition, biometric templates should only reconnect to personal data in specific cases, such as a service request or when a fan asks what data the club holds on them.
This separation keeps the system safe and effective while preventing unwanted access, reducing privacy risks, and guaranteeing GDPR or LGPD compliance when referring to Brasil.
Store biometric data securely and close to home
Secure biometric ticketing is not just about what data is collected but where and how it’s stored. Without realising it, many clubs increase risks by overlooking this.
Storage location matters in terms of legal compliance. Clubs processing and storing data internationally could face heavy fines as transfers across borders are restricted under the GDPR and LGPD. Furthermore, it can help the performance and reliability of the technology. Processing data locally at stadiums reduces lags and prevents relying on external networks.
Best Practices for Data Storage:
- Domestic data centres – only host fan onboarding service on servers located in the domestic country.
- Strict retention policies – automatically delete inactive fan data after a set period, reducing exposure in case of breaches.
- Enterprise-level security – use encrypted storage solutions from top-tier providers like AWS, Microsoft Azure, or Google Cloud.
By storing data close to home and processing it as close to real-time as possible, clubs ensure compliance, security, and a smooth fan experience.
Avoid biometric data processing of minors without parental consent
Processing biometric data for children requires explicit parental consent. To provide a valid solution, it’s crucial to distinguish when biometric processing actually takes place.
ID verification is not biometric processing.
Scanning an identity document only confirms identity and does not involve biometric data processing.
Face autocapture does count as biometric data processing.
The processing happens in the moment when the algorithm evaluates the quality of the face image to accept or reject it.
But we don’t need to get all the way to the second step. In most cases, minors under 15 cannot purchase tickets as they lack a valid ID or bank account. For those between 15-18 years old, their age should be detected at the ID scanning stage. This means the algorithm will recognize the person is a minor and block the minor from continuing to the second step of capturing a selfie. In such a case, the child won’t be able to purchase a ticket alone; a parent or guardian must do so on behalf of the minor. At that point, the child can provide a selfie, but again only with explicit parental approval.
Make sure you complete a DPIA before the implementation
A Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) is a structured process designed to identify, evaluate, and minimize risks associated with processing personal data, ensuring compliance with privacy regulations. Conducting a DPIA is mandatory when processing special categories of personal data, such as biometric data used for uniquely identifying individuals.
A DPIA assists organizations in assessing the necessity and proportionality of their data processing activities. This involves evaluating whether the processing achieves its intended purpose and if there are less intrusive alternatives available. By doing so, it helps in identifying and mitigating potential privacy risks before they materialize, thereby reducing the likelihood of data breaches and ensuring that data collection aligns with legal requirements.
Moreover, conducting a DPIA enhances transparency by allowing organizations to understand and oversee how their biometric providers comply with data protection regulations and implement necessary safeguards.
A DPIA goes further than only compliance. It is a critical step towards securing fan trust.
Clearly mark stadium zones where biometric data processing occurs
Clubs need to be transparent about the locations of biometric systems. Fans should always know when their biometric data is being processed. Additionally, those who prefer not to share certain data should have the option to use alternative entry methods.
To respect privacy laws, biometric checkpoints should be limited to designated stadium areas. They should not be extended to surrounding venues or public areas like streets. Furthermore, fans should have full control over their data and be able to request its deletion at any time. This creates trust and guarantees compliance.
Summary of how to implement facial ticketing with strong biometric data security
Implementing biometric ticketing is not just about adopting new technology. It requires precision and transparency. Done right, it enhances security, eliminates fraud, and improves the whole fan experience. However, done poorly, it creates more problems than it solves.
Although managing the biometric data security is difficult, the correct strategy ensures compliance, builds trust, and provides actual advantages. Clubs have to choose reliable technology and implement strong data protection measures. The only way to ensure security and fan trust is to invest in high-quality solutions.
At TruCrowd, we are proud to meet the highest standards in biometric ticketing. Our technology ranks among the top 10 globally, offering a secure, seamless, and compliant solution. If you want peace of mind, come talk to us. Whether you need to eliminate ticket fraud, improve stadium security, or optimize fan access, we ensure biometric data security while delivering the results you expect.
