Earlier this year, Action on Armed Violence (AOAV) published an investigation into Essex Police’s use of facial recognition technology linked to Corsight AI, a controversial Israeli surveillance firm whose software has reportedly been deployed by the Israeli military in Gaza. At the time, Essex Police refused to confirm whether its officers had met Corsight representatives, citing cost constraints and poor record-keeping. But they did admit that Corsight’s software was embedded in systems provided by Digital Barriers, a UK contractor.
This raised troubling questions about the force’s oversight of its surveillance technology supply chains.
Now, the situation at Corsight itself appears to be unravelling. According to a 1 July 2025 report by ID Tech, Ofer Ronen – Corsight’s Executive Vice President of Global Business Development and one of its most high-profile public figures – has abruptly left the company.
Other senior figures reportedly to leave Corsight since 2024 include Geraldo Sanga, the former Brazil Regional Manager who helped roll out facial recognition in Brazilian schools; David Douglas, the North America Sales Director with a background in U.S. law enforcement who played a key role in the firm’s American strategy; Dror Simsolo, the ex-Marketing Director who joined from rival firm Oosto and shaped Corsight’s public messaging; and Sunny Kong, the Asia Regional Manager, who had previously led sales for video analytics companies across the Asia-Pacific.
All this comes amid what industry insiders are describing as a “challenging market environment.” AOAV approached Ofer for comment. None was forthcoming at the time of publication.
Sources in the venture capital world, however, suggest the explanation is more stark: Corsight is now considered financially problematic. “No VC wants to be associated with technology perceived as being involved in human rights controversies,” said one investor, speaking anonymously.
In the wake of Israel’s military operations in Gaza, and amid growing allegations of surveillance-led targeting of civilians, Corsight’s involvement in these operations may have prompted investors to pull back.
Corsight, founded in 2019 as a spin-off from Cortica, developed its flagship system, Fortify, to perform facial recognition under conditions of low visibility or partial facial coverage. The company claimed to operate in more than 50 countries, promoting its AI-driven solutions for border control, retail security, and urban monitoring. But much of its growth, as Ronen repeatedly emphasised in media appearances, was built on high-security partnerships, with clients ranging from municipal governments to military and intelligence actors.
This commercial strategy now appears to under pressure. Despite Corsight’s announcement earlier this year that it was the first facial recognition company to obtain ISO 42001 certification for AI transparency, its public image has seemingly not recovered. And while the company has reportedly pushed a narrative of ethical AI, this sits uneasily with allegations as reported in multiple outlets, including The New York Times, where Israeli military insiders alleged facial recognition tools were used to monitor Palestinian civilians.
Given the opaque nature of Israel’s military-industrial complex, it remains difficult to independently verify such claims. But if Corsight’s core investors are pulling out, and if its senior staff are leaving in droves, this has implications not only for the company’s future, but also for its current and former clients.
This includes Essex Police.
Given this financial and reputational crisis, AOAV is calling on Essex Police and other Corsight-linked organisations (including the Mall of America in the United States) to respond to three urgent questions.
Are you aware of the management turnover and funding crisis facing Corsight AI?
The departure of Ofer Ronen, Geraldo Sanga, David Douglas, Dror Simsolo, and Sunny Kong is not the symptom of a healthy firm. For institutions that have integrated Corsight’s technology into public-facing surveillance systems, ongoing support, data security, and accountability must now be in doubt.
Have you reassessed your relationship with Corsight or its subcontractors in light of these developments?
At a time when facial recognition tools are under increasing public scrutiny, and when the Information Commissioner’s Office has already warned against their unregulated use, it is not sufficient to feign ignorance of a supplier’s human rights record or financial stability.
What safeguards do you have in place to prevent engagement with other companies allegedly linked to rights abuses or those that global sanctions risk?
UK police forces, including Essex, appear to have no centralised log of meetings or clear procurement audit trails for technology vendors. This absence of due diligence erodes public trust and invites scrutiny.
What is clear is that the reliance on opaque subcontracting arrangements, as seen with Digital Barriers’ licensing of Corsight’s facial recognition software, does not absolve end users from responsibility. Ethical policing in the age of AI demands more than blind procurement. It demands transparency, accountability, and the moral courage to sever ties with companies whose technology may have been used to enable systematic surveillance or military attacks in contested spaces.
The opacity from Essex Police and other entities that have worked with Corsight is troubling. If Corsight’s links to the Israeli military and the war in Gaza have indeed led to a collapse in investor confidence, as some in the industry now believe, then it is imperative that all Corsight clients reconsider their partnerships—and make public their reasoning.
AOAV’s original reporting raised red flags. The latest developments at Corsight suggest those concerns were well-founded.
We will continue to ask uncomfortable questions. And we urge others to do the same.
Did you find this story interesting? Please support AOAV's work and donate.
Donate