Look who’s recording: Meta smart glasses are raising privacy concerns in the UAE

If smartphones have made constant filming more acceptable, smart glasses are making it less visible. Suddenly, there’s a humming fear that our presence in public and private spaces could violate our privacy. Anyone could be filming you.

And this is what’s been happening. How people are using Meta glasses has been less benign. The glasses that could be used to photograph, film, or audio-record people without their knowledge, when we’re on the street, at the store, and in our workplaces, are becoming fodder for content creation and are selling in the millions. Many of these videos are posted online without the consent of their subjects.

This has sparked concerns about privacy violations, along with a report that Meta added a facial recognition feature and collects ever more personal data with too little scrutiny or regulation, culminating in a global campaign against the smart glasses.

Now, Meta glasses are available in the UAE, and being secretly recorded is the primary fear; people worry about how smart glasses could affect cultural values such as modesty, family privacy, and social etiquette.

“In Emirati society, family privacy and modesty are sacred cultural boundaries,” says Qadreya Al Awadhi, Founder & CEO of Bumblebee. “With a smartphone, if someone points a camera at your family, you can immediately tell them to stop recording. With smart glasses, that obvious physical cue completely disappears.” 

Meta claims that, to protect against this, every pair of glasses has an LED light that’s supposed to let people know the glasses are recording. But Al Awadhi says relying on a tiny LED light to signal recording “simply doesn’t cut it in real life as it is easily missed.”

“It makes enforcing our natural, everyday social boundaries almost impossible in shared public spaces,” she adds. 

“As a woman, the worst case scares me: a stranger films you, AI identifies you, and soon he knows where you live. That stalking and assault made frictionless, built into the design,” says Asma Derja, founder of the Ethical AI Alliance.

“These glasses are completely against the cultural expectations of the Gulf. I can’t find a single point where they fit. Islamic culture is built on discretion: haya, modesty, and sitr, protecting the privacy of others. A hidden camera on someone’s face breaks all of it. Women are already exposed, in public and online. Technology-facilitated gender-based violence is real and growing, and these glasses give abusers one more tool,” adds Derja.

While these smart glasses can translate speech, identify objects, answer questions, and capture photos or video hands-free, says Feba Rachel, a Dubai-based Data Privacy Counsel, “the worst case is covert, continuous capture: recording people without their knowledge, then pairing footage with facial recognition and AI to identify, profile or harass them.”

“Cloud AI may also process their faces and voices. The wearer consents. The bystander never did,” she adds.

In the GCC, privacy extends beyond personal data to family honor, modesty and expectations about who may photograph or record others, says Dr. Fadi Alhaddadin, Assistant Professor at Heriot-Watt University Dubai. “Smart glasses could capture women, family gatherings or private conversations without permission, potentially violating deeply held cultural expectations.”

“Their discreet design makes recording difficult to detect, weakening traditional social cues that allow people to object. Even without malicious intent, their presence could create mistrust and discourage natural interactions in social settings,” he adds.

Earlier this month, on a social media post, Dubai Municipality urged residents to switch off surveillance cameras when not in use and avoid untrusted links. Warning that a single weak setting could leave privacy exposed in an increasingly connected environment, it said: “Protecting your privacy starts with securing your surveillance cameras.”

Meta makes a number of privacy assurances about the glasses, promising users they are “designed for privacy” and that Meta doesn’t have access to recordings made with the glasses. However, a joint investigation by the Swedish newspapers Svenska Dagbladet and Göteborgs-Posten revealed that Meta was, in fact, storing recordings made by glasses wearers and that the content may be fed into Meta’s AI models. 

“The darker side is what happens when surveillance becomes invisible,” says Al Awadhi. While she’s confident that the UAE laws will heavily penalize anyone who publishes a video of someone online without consent, she says, “The real danger is covert live-streaming or private data collection—like feeding live video into facial recognition systems or training AI models without our knowledge or consent.”

PRIVACY AND ADOPTION CHALLENGES

Meta has not yet announced official release dates for the rest of the GCC, but experts believe privacy concerns would be a barrier to adopting smart glasses.

“Privacy concerns will absolutely challenge adoption,” says Al Awadhi. “Meta actually had to program their glasses to automatically disable the camera if a user covers or tampers with the recording LED light to trick people or record without their consent.”

But globally, she says, many argue that it isn’t enough. “European regulators are investigating whether a tiny light constitutes real consent under the GDPR.” 

But are current privacy and cybercrime laws in the region keeping up with advanced wearable tech?

“Several GCC countries already criminalize photographing people without their consent, so this product leans toward unlawful use by design,” says Derja. “The real gap is enforcement: you can’t object to a camera you can’t see. The burden should sit with manufacturers and importers, and the people being recorded should be protected. If a product depends on breaking the law, it has no place on the shelves.”

Al Awadhi adds that “GCC legal frameworks will need to evolve similarly to address hardware that silently and maliciously captures people’s lives.”

The GCC laws were written for phones, and not always-on cameras, says Rachel. “The UAE cybercrime law protects people from being filmed without consent, yet the UAE PDPL excludes data collected for personal use so that a wearer may fall outside it. DIFC’s Regulation 10 on AI systems is a model; regulators should clarify bystander consent.”

Banning smart glasses will be increasingly difficult; they are here to stay. But what happens when we’re always being recorded at schools, hospitals, religious sites, government facilities, and private businesses? 

Experts say laws should reflect how AI is changing the landscape. The question is the rules of engagement and stronger safeguards before they become commonplace.

“Many government workplaces have prohibited them, because confidential spaces cannot depend on trust alone. Expect similar bans in hospitals, schools, and places of worship, plus mandatory recording indicators and consent-by-design. Venues should post clear no-recording signage. Convenience should never be paid for with someone else’s privacy,” says Rachel.

Dr. Fadi Alhaddadin says smart glasses’ long-term acceptance will depend on public trust and responsible use. “If people assume they are constantly being recorded, they may become less open in classrooms, hospitals, religious sites and workplaces. We risk normalizing surveillance and encouraging self-censorship.”

He adds that “clear recording rules, restricted zones and a strong culture of consent will be essential to protect human dignity and freedom.”

“Luckily, we live in the UAE, where there are robust laws protecting privacy. If constant, inconspicuous recording in sensitive areas like schools or hospitals starts to get out of hand, I am confident the government will take necessary measures to address it. They are incredibly proactive and won’t hesitate to step in, heavily restrict, or even completely outlaw their use in public spaces to protect the community,” says Al Awadhi.