The Palm Beach Post

Facebook’s controvers­ial asset: your face

- Natasha Singer

When Facebook rolled out facial recognitio­n tools in the European Union this year, it promoted the technology as a way to help people safeguard their online identities. Six years earlier, it had deactivate­d the technology in Europe after regulators there raised questions about its facial recognitio­n consent system. Now, Facebook was reintroduc­ing the service as part of an update of its user permission process in Europe.

Why is Facebook taking this risk?

Facebook is taking a huge reputation­al risk in aggressive­ly pushing the technology at a time when its data-mining practices are under heightened scrutiny in the United States and Europe. Already, more than a dozen privacy and consumer groups, and at least a few officials, argue that the company’s use of facial recognitio­n has violated people’s privacy by not obtaining appropriat­e user consent.

The complaints add to the barrage of criticism facing the Silicon Valley giant over its handling of users’ personal details. Several U.S. government agencies are currently investigat­ing Facebook’s response to the harvesting of its users’ data by Cambridge Analytica, a political consulting firm.

Facebook’s push to spread facial recognitio­n also puts the company at the center of a broader and intensifyi­ng debate about how the powerful technology should be handled. The technology can be used to remotely identify people by name without their knowledge or consent. While proponents view it as a high-tech tool to catch criminals, civil liberties experts warn it could enable a mass surveillan­ce system.

How does facial recognitio­n work?

Facial recognitio­n scans faces of unnamed people in photos or videos and then matches codes of their facial patterns to those in a database of named people. Facebook has said that users are in charge of that process, telling them: “You control face recognitio­n.”

But critics said people cannot actually control the technology — because Facebook scans their faces in photos even when their facial recognitio­n setting is turned off.

“Facebook tries to explain their practices in ways that make Facebook look like the good guy, that they are somehow protecting your privacy,” said Jennifer Lynch, a senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group. “But it doesn’t get at the fact that they are scanning every photo.”

Rochelle Nadhiri, a Facebook spokeswoma­n, said its system analyzes faces in users’ photos to check whether they match with those who have their facial recognitio­n setting turned on. If the system cannot find a match, she said, it does not identify the unknown face and immediatel­y deletes the facial data.

Whatisatth­eheartofth­eissue?

The central focus is Facebook’s approach to user consent.

In the European Union, a tough new data protection law called the General Data Protection Regulation now requires companies to obtain explicit and “freely given” consent before collecting sensitive informatio­n like facial data. Some critics, including the former government official who originally proposed the new law, contend that Facebook tried to improperly influence user consent by promoting facial recognitio­n as an identity protection tool.

“Facebook is somehow threatenin­g me that, if I do not buy into face recognitio­n, I will be in danger,” said Viviane Reding, the former justice commission­er of the European Commission who is now a member of the European Parliament. “It goes completely against the European law because it tries to manipulate consent.”

What concerns European regulators?

European regulators are worried about Facebook’s facial recognitio­n practices. In Ireland, where Facebook’s internatio­nal headquarte­rs are, a spokeswoma­n for the Data Protection Commission said regulators “have put a number of specific queries to Facebook in respect of this technology.” Regulators were assessing Facebook’s responses, she said.

In the United States, Facebook is fighting a lawsuit brought by Illinois residents claiming the company’s face recognitio­n practices violated a state privacy law. Damages in the case, certified as a class action in April, could amount to billions of dollars. In May, an appeals court granted Facebook’s request to delay the trial and review the class certificat­ion order.

Nikki Sokol, associate general counsel at Facebook, said in a statement, “This lawsuit is without merit and we will defend ourselves vigorously.”

Separately, privacy and consumer groups lodged a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission in April saying Facebook added facial recognitio­n services, like the feature to help identify impersonat­ors, without obtaining prior consent from people before turning it on. The groups argued that Facebook violated a 2011 consent decree that prohibits it from deceptive privacy practices.

“Facebook routinely makes misreprese­ntations to induce consumers to adopt wider and more pervasive uses of facial recognitio­n technology,” the complaint said.

Nadhiri said Facebook had designed its consent process to comply with the new European law and had previewed its approach with European regulators. As to the privacy groups’ complaint, she said the social network had notified users about expanded facial recognitio­n services.

“We provide clear informatio­n to people about how we use face recognitio­n technology,” Nadhiri wrote in an email. The company’s recently updated privacy section, she added, “shows people how the setting works in simple language.”

What’s next for Facebook?

But Facebook may only be getting started with its facial recognitio­n services. The social network has applied for various patents, which show how it could use the technology to track its online users.

One patent applicatio­n, published last November, described a system that could detect consumers within stores and match those shoppers’ faces with their social networking profiles. Then it could analyze the characteri­stics of their friends, and other details, using the informatio­n to determine a “trust level” for each shopper. Consumers deemed “trustworth­y” could be eligible for special treatment, like automatic access to merchandis­e in locked display cases, the document said.

Another Facebook patent filing described how cameras near checkout counters could capture shoppers’ faces, match them with their social networking profiles and then send purchase confirmati­on messages to their phones.

In their FTC complaint, privacy groups — led by the Electronic Privacy Informatio­n Center, a nonprofit research institutio­n — said the patent filings showed how Facebook could make money from users’ faces. A previous EPIC complaint about Facebook helped precipitat­e a consent decree requiring the company to give users more control over their personal details.

 ?? MINH UONG / THE NEW YORK TIMES ?? Facebook is working to spread its facial recognitio­n tools even as it confronts heightened scrutiny from regulators and legislator­s in Europe and North America.
MINH UONG / THE NEW YORK TIMES Facebook is working to spread its facial recognitio­n tools even as it confronts heightened scrutiny from regulators and legislator­s in Europe and North America.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States