In short
Two deployments Ayonix is authorised to publish: a United Nations border-control project across more than 20 cameras, and ITOCHU Techno-Solutions replacing RFID office access cards with Ayonix FaceID. No unnamed customer, invented metric or unapproved deployment appears here.
No anonymised customer, no invented metric, no testimonial, and no deployment Ayonix is not authorised to describe. Face recognition customers in government and border environments frequently cannot be named, and a vendor that solves that by publishing unverifiable anonymised cases has solved a marketing problem rather than an evidence one. Two cases you can check are worth more than ten you cannot.
Enterprise · IT services
ITOCHU Techno-Solutions Corporation (CTC)
ITOCHU Techno-Solutions adopted Ayonix FaceID across its offices in 2016, using iPads as facial-authentication terminals to replace RFID access cards.
4 stated limitations · Last reviewed 11 September 2026
Read the case study
International organisation · border control
United Nations
Ayonix face recognition across more than 20 border-gate cameras for a United Nations border-control project, supporting identity verification and passport control.
5 stated limitations · Last reviewed 11 September 2026
Read the case studyStandard
Applied to both of the above, and to any that are added. A case study that cannot meet these is not published.
Each case study names the claim in the evidence register that authorises publishing it. No registration, no case study.
Named where the customer permits it. Where naming is not authorised, a description only if that description is accurate and approved — never a flattering approximation.
Where the account comes from, linked. Ideally the customer’s own published statement rather than the vendor’s retelling of it.
What the case does not establish, listed explicitly. Both current case studies carry four or five, and the list is as prominent as the narrative.
A photograph of the actual deployment where one has been released; otherwise a public-domain or CC0 image with a note saying it is not the site.
No accuracy figure, throughput improvement, cost saving or testimonial that has not been released for publication. This is the rule that keeps the list short.
Because those are the two deployments Ayonix is authorised to publish. Face recognition customers in government, border and enterprise security environments frequently cannot be named, and a vendor that solves this by publishing anonymised case studies full of unverifiable numbers has solved a marketing problem rather than an evidence problem. Two verifiable cases are worth more than ten that cannot be checked.
Because no figures have been released for publication. An accuracy rate, a throughput improvement or a cost saving would be more persuasive and would not be verifiable by a reader, which is the trade this site consistently refuses. Where such detail exists it can be discussed during procurement, sometimes under NDA.
No, and each page says so explicitly. They are public-domain or CC0 photographs of comparable environments, registered in the image licence file, and each page states that the image is not of that deployment. Ayonix has not released project photography for publication. Using a photograph while implying it shows a named customer’s site would be a fabrication, so the label is not a formality.
That is a procurement conversation rather than a website one, because it depends on what a given customer has agreed to. What can be said publicly is what is on these pages; what can be said under NDA to a serious buyer is more.
Next step
What is publishable is on these pages. What can be discussed with a serious buyer, sometimes under NDA, is more. Start with the environment you are trying to solve and the conversation goes where it can usefully go.