The Australian privacy regulator has opened an investigation into the China-based software company behind the HeyCyan app in Kmart’s $89 smartglasses, following public outrage over the covert use of the devices.

In August, Guardian Australia reported Kmart had sold out of the Anko-branded discount version of Meta’s smartglasses that can capture images and record high-definition video, which led to widespread concern and calls to ban or restrict their use.

The glasses were removed from Kmart’s website as of Wednesday. The retailer has been approached for comment.

A GetUp petition has had more than 55,000 signatures calling to restrict the use of what has been labelled as “pervert glasses”, and councils around the country have looked to ban the glasses in public spaces such as swimming pools. The federal government is also considering a restriction on use in government workplaces.

The Australian privacy commissioner, Carly Kind, was asked by the attorney general to assess the privacy implications of the glasses at the time.

Kind wrote to Kmart and BDI Technology, retailers for the glasses, as well as Shenzhen Qingcheng, the app maker behind the HeyCyan app in the glasses. She also wrote to Meta – for its Ray-Bans glasses – and Google which is planning its own smartglasses.

In a blog post on Wednesday, Kind announced an investigation has been opened into Shenzhen Qingcheng after it failed to respond to inquiries, “as well as concerns arising from third party analysis of the technology itself as well as the entity’s privacy policy”

None of the other companies will be investigated as part of this process, Kind said.

The privacy commissioner also highlighted the difficulty in applying privacy law to individuals who may use the devices given the privacy act only applies to companies and Commonwealth agencies – not individuals.

“Retailers that sell smart glasses – for example on an e-commerce website – or companies that manufacture them, may not have any Privacy Act obligations if they do not collect any personal information with respect to those devices,” Kind said.

“Instead, the entity providing the software at use in the device is likely to be the entity that collects and holds the information for the purpose of privacy law.”

Kind said that potential changes to the privacy act proposed by the government would strengthen how privacy law would apply to surveillance wearables such as smartglasses.

“The most substantial change will be the replacement of the ‘reasonably necessary for an entity’s functions and activities’ test with a ‘fair and reasonable’ test,” she said.

“The new test will require an entity to look at a range of factors, including the extent to which an individual had genuine choice in the collection of their personal information, as well as the best interests of the child where children are involved.”

Kind said she hoped the community would “find comfort” in the proposed reforms as it would raise the bar over what personal information smartglasses can collect.

“These reforms are likely to become increasingly necessary as we face subsequent generations of surveillance wearables and connected devices, from personal assistant gadgets to ambient recording badges.”

Researchers at the University of Sydney in August analysed 350 publicly-available Instagram videos shot on smartglasses from around the world during 2023 to 2026, showing what they said was “a shift to discreet, point-of-view recording that is difficult for bystanders to detect”.

In a subset of these videos, about 60% of interactions could be classified as potential harassment, with subjects visibly uneasy or attempting to disengage.

Canterbury-Bankstown and Sydney City are among the councils in Sydney to have banned the glasses from some venues, as well as Brisbane in Queensland, and Yarra city council in Melbourne.

Shenzhen Qingcheng was approached for comment.