20 million smart glasses: There could be as many as 20 million smart glasses in circulation worldwide by the end of the year.
No one knows how many smart glasses are in Norway
“It’s completely out of control,” warns expert.
More than seven million Meta smart glasses were sold during 2025, and all indications suggest sales have continued to rise this year. Some forecasts estimate that as many as 20 million Meta smart glasses could be in circulation by the time the New Year arrives.
The glasses look much like ordinary eyewear, but they can record video, capture audio and provide real-time information about the world around you.
When you're walking down the street today, someone could be recording you without your knowledge. In some cases, the technology could potentially be used to identify you based on information that is publicly available online.
But how many of these devices are actually around you here in Norway? No one knows.
What do some of Norway's leading experts think about smart glasses and the privacy challenges they raise? Watch the debate.
We have no idea of the scale
Tekna Magasinet contacted Brilleland, Interoptik and Synsam, but none of them was willing to disclose sales figures.
Nor has the Electronics Industry Foundation received sales data for smart glasses. EssilorLuxottica, the company that manufactures the glasses for Meta, did not respond to requests for comment.
"The fact that no one knows how many of these glasses are in circulation is a problem. I think it says a lot about the situation. We have no idea of the scale of a technology that neither current regulations nor enforcement mechanisms were designed to deal with," says Simen Sommerfeldt.
"It feels deeply intrusive"
Sommerfeldt works with professional marketing communications at Bouvet and is co-author of the book Privacy and GDPR in Practice.
"If we combine the potential harms with the number of glasses already in circulation, we get a sense of how urgent it is to address this issue."
"It's a bit like being a pedestrian when cars first arrived. There were no proper traffic rules, so if you were hit, it was almost considered your own fault. Over time, we introduced regulations that made it safe."
"How do you personally feel about being secretly recorded?"
"It feels deeply intrusive. I think you'll attract suspicious looks if you walk around wearing these glasses today. They create a sense of anxiety."
He fears a dystopian surveillance society in which people can no longer move about anonymously.
"I especially worry about today's children and young people growing up in a world where they never know whether they're being filmed. The data can follow them for the rest of their lives, and it becomes easier to engage in blackmail and other forms of abuse. At the same time, some people live at protected addresses for a reason."
He explains that the glasses can recognise objects and, potentially, people.
"Meta says facial recognition is enabled in the United States but not in the EU. It's impossible to know whether that is actually true."
"They say they comply with GDPR in Europe, but from where I stand they have considerable freedom to operate. There's also a major difference between what they do with the data themselves and what they share with others."
"What could Meta use the data it collects for?"
"Our concern is that people captured by these glasses become raw material for other companies' data collection efforts without ever knowing it. You are not told who receives your data, nor how you can exercise your rights. It's very difficult to get a clear picture of what is actually happening."
And Meta is far from the only company making these types of glasses.
"Meta's terms and conditions give the company significant room for manoeuvre. For example, it shares material with subcontractors for AI training."
This particular use of data made headlines earlier this year when a subcontractor reviewing material used to train AI systems reportedly encountered footage that included bathroom visits and other highly private situations.
"Could the people wearing these glasses also be exploited?"
"In a way, they become unwilling accomplices. The fact that we have to leave these decisions to whoever happens to be wearing the glasses at the time means the situation is completely out of control. We simply can't assume that everyone who buys these glasses will make the right decisions."
"If you record a video, it is initially stored locally on the glasses. But once the footage is transferred to a mobile phone, it may be stored within Meta's European ecosystem."
Meta is not the only supplier in this rapidly expanding market.
"It's important to remember that Meta is just one vendor. I've already seen five other brands of AI-powered glasses on sale in stores. Are all of those providers complying with GDPR? Frankly, it feels out of control."
"China also produces AI glasses. Are they available in Norway?"
"Even if they are not sold in physical stores, they are easy to buy online."
A ban in your workplace?
Another potential concern is the use of smart glasses in the workplace.
"Think about what these glasses could mean for trade secrets, confidential information and your colleagues. Rules already exist that prohibit certain forms of misuse, but people can easily make mistakes," says Simen Sommerfeldt.
"At Bouvet, where I work, we have introduced a complete ban on smart glasses both at work and at social events. The aim is to protect privacy, safeguard confidential information and reduce the risk of unauthorised recording and data collection."
"I believe every company should do the same. If the authorities are not introducing restrictions, organisations can do so locally."
"No one wants to be secretly recorded at work"
Elisabet Haugsbø, President of Tekna, believes there are several problematic aspects to covert recording in the workplace.
"The most troubling issue is that the workplace should be a safe environment with clear rules and expectations. It should not be a place where people feel they have to worry about being filmed, photographed or recorded. This is a problem for employees and managers alike."
"There is also the issue of sensitive information, whether it belongs to clients or consists of internal company data that must never be disclosed. With these glasses, it takes very little to record something that should never have been captured in the first place."
She notes that most workplaces already have strict policies regarding information security and so-called "bring your own device" arrangements, precisely to ensure that company and customer information remains secure.
"My advice is that all organisations should introduce a complete ban on smart glasses, at least for now, until they have gone through a proper internal process to assess whether there is any legitimate need for them. We need to ask ourselves: why should these glasses be used at work in the first place?"
"There may be situations where the technology has legitimate benefits, but those cases should be carefully assessed internally. I would also expect strict rules governing their use because of the potentially significant impact on privacy and workplace wellbeing. After all, no one wants to be secretly recorded at work."
Could Norway introduce a nationwide ban?
Norway's Minister of Digitalisation, Karianne Tung, is considering a ban on facial recognition through smart glasses, while the Norwegian Consumer Council believes such a ban should be investigated and the Norwegian Data Protection Authority has called for sales of smart glasses to be halted.
Simen Sommerfeldt believes a nationwide ban may be difficult to achieve in the short term.
"The legislation is designed to be technology-neutral, so in theory it should already cover this. In practice, however, enforcement becomes almost impossible when so many smart glasses are in circulation. Our room for manoeuvre is limited, and we need to think more at a European level."
"The Omnibus initiative showed that changes to GDPR and EU regulations can be introduced relatively quickly. We should be putting pressure on Brussels and the European Commission, and I don't think it would be difficult to bring other European countries on board."
Johannes Brodwall, a software development technology leader at Gnist Consulting AS, is more optimistic.
"All it takes is a parliamentary majority to regulate this. I am actively involved in digital policy work for the Green Party, and we intend to propose legislation in this area."
"The wording I have suggested would ban both the sale of concealed body cameras and the wearing of concealed body cameras in public spaces. We intend to introduce a private member's bill when Parliament reconvenes."
Brodwall believes the next stage of development will involve audio devices rather than glasses.
"The next products on the horizon are headphones with built-in cameras. You could call them 'pervo-pods'. That's exactly why regulations need to remain technology-neutral."
New regulations are on the way
New regulations such as the EU AI Act and the Digital Services Act are already being introduced, but Sommerfeldt argues that they were primarily designed to address different challenges.
"The current framework is definitely not sufficient. GDPR needs to be updated, and the rules have to be simple enough for both individuals and companies to understand and follow."
At the same time, he believes accommodations should be made for people who genuinely benefit from smart glasses, such as those with visual impairments.
"We have to apply common sense and make allowances for people with disabilities, for example. That can be handled through a normal consultation process. The glasses could be made more visible, and safeguards could be put in place to ensure information is not shared unnecessarily."
For now, it is usually possible to identify who is wearing these devices, even though some users have reportedly found ways to disable or conceal the indicator light that signals recording is taking place. But as the technology continues to evolve, one question remains: how can future regulations keep pace with products that may one day record through contact lenses or other near-invisible devices?
