The catalogue

Canadian privacy & access decisions

The comprehensive archive of federal, provincial, and territorial commissioner decisions — each with a plain-language summary.

1,324 decisions matching
British ColumbiaFreedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
British Columbia flag

F22-15 — BC OIPC order 2495

Subscribe to open British Columbia decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
OntarioFreedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Ontario flag

Order PO-4250

Subscribe to open Ontario decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
OntarioFreedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Ontario flag

Order PO-4249

Subscribe to open Ontario decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
OntarioMunicipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Ontario flag

Order MO-4182

Subscribe to open Ontario decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
OntarioMunicipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Ontario flag

Order MO-4185

Subscribe to open Ontario decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
OntarioMunicipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Ontario flag

Order MO-4184

Subscribe to open Ontario decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
OntarioMunicipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Ontario flag

Order MO-4183-F

Subscribe to open Ontario decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
QuebecAct respecting access to documents held by public bodies and the protection of personal information
Quebec flag

2022 QCCAI 83 — Commission des normes, de l'équité, de la santé et de la sécurité au travail (CNESST)

Subscribe to open Quebec decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
Nova ScotiaMunicipal Government Act — Part XX (Information Access and Protection of Privacy)
Nova Scotia flag

22-09 — New Glasgow Regional Police

Subscribe to open Nova Scotia decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
SaskatchewanLocal Authority Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Saskatchewan flag

REVIEW REPORT 084-2020, 085-2020, 086-2020, 088-2020, 090-2020, 091-2020, 092-2020 — Resort Village of Candle Lake

Subscribe to open Saskatchewan decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
SaskatchewanFreedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Saskatchewan flag

Review Report 134-2020 — Farm Land Security Board

Subscribe to open Saskatchewan decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
OntarioMunicipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Ontario flag

Order MO-4181

Subscribe to open Ontario decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
Federal (Canada)Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents ActWell-founded & conditionally resolved
Federal (Canada) flag
Mar 30, 2022PIPEDA Findings #2022-003Indexed Jun 30, 2026

PIPEDA Findings #2022-003: Telecommunications firm failed to obtain appropriate consent for voiceprint authentication program

Rogers Communications Inc.

The complainant alleged that Rogers Communications Inc. improperly enrolled her in its Voice ID voiceprint authentication program without her consent and failed to allow her to opt out or delete her voiceprint. Rogers utilized a passive voiceprinting technology, "tuning," to create algorithmic voiceprints for customer authentication and fraud prevention. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner (OPC) found Rogers' purpose for collecting voiceprints to be appropriate, concluding this aspect of the complaint was not well-founded. However, the OPC determined that Rogers failed to obtain valid and meaningful express consent for the collection of sensitive biometric voiceprints, both during the "tuning" process and enrolment, as customers would not reasonably expect this. Furthermore, Rogers did not provide a clearly explained and easily accessible option for individuals to opt out and improperly retained voiceprints of opted-out individuals without any actual purpose. The OPC also identified deficiencies in Rogers' training materials and monitoring protocols for ensuring staff obtained valid consent. In response to OPC recommendations, Rogers committed to significant changes, including obtaining express consent before tuning, clearly informing customers of opt-out/deletion, deleting retained voiceprints, and improving training and monitoring. Consequently, the consent and retention aspects of the complaint were found to be well-founded and conditionally resolved.

Quick view

Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents ActWell-founded & conditionally resolved

PIPEDA Findings #2022-003: Telecommunications firm failed to obtain appropriate consent for voiceprint authentication program

Mar 30, 2022PIPEDA Findings #2022-003
Adjudicator: Daniel Therrien
Plain-Language Summary

The complainant alleged that Rogers Communications Inc. improperly enrolled her in its Voice ID voiceprint authentication program without her consent and failed to allow her to opt out or delete her voiceprint. Rogers utilized a passive voiceprinting technology, "tuning," to create algorithmic voiceprints for customer authentication and fraud prevention. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner (OPC) found Rogers' purpose for collecting voiceprints to be appropriate, concluding this aspect of the complaint was not well-founded. However, the OPC determined that Rogers failed to obtain valid and meaningful express consent for the collection of sensitive biometric voiceprints, both during the "tuning" process and enrolment, as customers would not reasonably expect this. Furthermore, Rogers did not provide a clearly explained and easily accessible option for individuals to opt out and improperly retained voiceprints of opted-out individuals without any actual purpose. The OPC also identified deficiencies in Rogers' training materials and monitoring protocols for ensuring staff obtained valid consent. In response to OPC recommendations, Rogers committed to significant changes, including obtaining express consent before tuning, clearly informing customers of opt-out/deletion, deleting retained voiceprints, and improving training and monitoring. Consequently, the consent and retention aspects of the complaint were found to be well-founded and conditionally resolved.

Key Issues
  • Whether the collection and use of voiceprints for authentication and fraud prevention constituted an appropriate purpose under PIPEDA s. 5(3)
  • Whether Rogers obtained valid and meaningful consent for the collection of voiceprints (tuning and enrolment) under PIPEDA Principle 4.3 and s. 6.1
  • Whether Rogers provided an adequate mechanism for the withdrawal of consent under PIPEDA Principle 4.3.8
  • Whether Rogers' retention of voiceprints after opt-out was compliant with PIPEDA Principle 4.5.3
  • Whether Rogers' training materials and protocols for obtaining consent were adequate
SaskatchewanLocal Authority Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Saskatchewan flag

Investigation Report 166-2021 — Rural Municipality of North Qu’Appelle No. 187

Subscribe to open Saskatchewan decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction
SaskatchewanLocal Authority Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Saskatchewan flag

Review Report 206-2021 — Regina Police Service

Subscribe to open Saskatchewan decisions.

Unlock this jurisdiction