Who Owns My Face? -- A Capitol Hill Update
By Cian Cashin
This week Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller asked the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to provide a report to the Committee on the growing use of facial recognition technology and outline what that means for consumers. We all know the need for inclusion of certain biometric security measures on the license, but can his request have implications for the collection and use of data by the public sector? Most of his concerns lie around the collection and use of this data by private online technology companies such as Google, Facebook and Apple, who have reportedly experimented with facial recognition components in their consumer products in a manner that raises serious privacy concerns. The thought on the issue is that if this data starts to serve as a widely collected verification measure in general terms, its use as a reliable component of identity security becomes diluted if the proper security protocols around both collection and use of that data jeopardize its use for those that rely on the information as a key component of identity protections. The intent of his letter is to fully explore the capabilities of the technology and ensure the appropriate privacy protections are in place as the Commerce Committee begins to explore privacy legislation. My two cents on this are that if collection is done on the front end of consumer applications by private companies to tie data and consumer information to a face, that entire identity profile becomes a portfolio of information that needs to be safeguarded by the standards given personally identifiable information (PII). Linking data to stored facial recognition patterns is inherently dangerous unless a strong investment is made to ensure its safe. The nexus between something granting access to PII and the information behind the face itself is something that needs attention and focus as privacy protection legislation continues to evolve in the fight against identity theft.
In other developments, the Senate’s progress on the first of numerous smaller fiscal 2012 spending packages (HR 2112) bodes well for avoiding a single catchall omnibus measure. HR 2112 originated as a single appropriations measure for Agriculture, but has since grown to incorporate FY 12 spending for Commerce, Justice, Science (the bill formerly known as S 1572) and the FY 12 Transportation-HUD spending measure (S 1596) – to create the first of several proposed “minibuses.” The current continuing resolution (PL 112-36) will keep the government running through November 18 – but whispers indicate many legislators believe another stopgap measure may be needed to avert a shutdown. Again timing becomes crucial as legislators proceed, and the rhetoric around the catastrophic effects these short-term spending bills have had on the nation’s economy is continue to escalate.
This week Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller asked the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to provide a report to the Committee on the growing use of facial recognition technology and outline what that means for consumers. We all know the need for inclusion of certain biometric security measures on the license, but can his request have implications for the collection and use of data by the public sector? Most of his concerns lie around the collection and use of this data by private online technology companies such as Google, Facebook and Apple, who have reportedly experimented with facial recognition components in their consumer products in a manner that raises serious privacy concerns. The thought on the issue is that if this data starts to serve as a widely collected verification measure in general terms, its use as a reliable component of identity security becomes diluted if the proper security protocols around both collection and use of that data jeopardize its use for those that rely on the information as a key component of identity protections. The intent of his letter is to fully explore the capabilities of the technology and ensure the appropriate privacy protections are in place as the Commerce Committee begins to explore privacy legislation. My two cents on this are that if collection is done on the front end of consumer applications by private companies to tie data and consumer information to a face, that entire identity profile becomes a portfolio of information that needs to be safeguarded by the standards given personally identifiable information (PII). Linking data to stored facial recognition patterns is inherently dangerous unless a strong investment is made to ensure its safe. The nexus between something granting access to PII and the information behind the face itself is something that needs attention and focus as privacy protection legislation continues to evolve in the fight against identity theft.
In other developments, the Senate’s progress on the first of numerous smaller fiscal 2012 spending packages (HR 2112) bodes well for avoiding a single catchall omnibus measure. HR 2112 originated as a single appropriations measure for Agriculture, but has since grown to incorporate FY 12 spending for Commerce, Justice, Science (the bill formerly known as S 1572) and the FY 12 Transportation-HUD spending measure (S 1596) – to create the first of several proposed “minibuses.” The current continuing resolution (PL 112-36) will keep the government running through November 18 – but whispers indicate many legislators believe another stopgap measure may be needed to avert a shutdown. Again timing becomes crucial as legislators proceed, and the rhetoric around the catastrophic effects these short-term spending bills have had on the nation’s economy is continue to escalate.
Cian I couldn't agree more, while there might be a case for facial recognition software, and it is being used, there is also an issue of security, frequently we hear horror stories of secure data no longer being secure. It's worrying.
Reply to this