Chicago Tribune (Sunday)

New software may help thwart facial recognitio­n

- By Kashmir Hill

In recent years, companies have been prowling the web for public photos associated with people’s names that they can use to build enormous databases of faces and improve their facialreco­gnition systems, adding to a growing sense that personal privacy is being lost, bit by digital bit.

Clearview AI, for example, scraped billions of online photos to build a tool for police that could lead them from a face to a Facebook account, revealing a person’s identity.

Now researcher­s are trying to foil those systems. A team of computer engineers at the University of Chicago has developed a tool that disguises photos with pixellevel changes that confuse facial recognitio­n systems.

Named Fawkes in honor of the Guy Fawkes mask favored by protesters worldwide, the software was made available to developers on the researcher­s’ website last month. After being discovered by Hacker News, it has been downloaded more than 50,000 times. The researcher­s are working on a free app version for noncoders.

The software is not intended to be a one-off tool for privacy-loving individual­s. If deployed across millions of images, it would be a broadside against facial recognitio­n systems.

“Our goal is to make Clearview go away,” said Ben Zhao, a professor of computer science at the University of Chicago.

Fawkes converts an image — or “cloaks” it, in the researcher­s’ parlance — by subtly altering some of the features that facial recognitio­n systems depend on when they construct a person’s face print.

In a research paper, reported earlier by OneZero, the team describes “cloaking” photos of actress Gwyneth Paltrow using actor Patrick Dempsey’s face, so that a system learning what Paltrow looks like based on those photos would start associatin­g her with some of the features of Dempsey’s face.

To test the tool, I asked the team to cloak some images of my family and me. I then uploaded the originals and the cloaked images to Facebook to see if they fooled the social network’s facial recognitio­n system. It worked: Facebook tagged me in the original photo but did not recognize me in the cloaked version.

But the changes to the photos were noticeable to the naked eye. In the altered images, I looked ghoulish, my 3-year-old daughter sprouted what looked like facial hair, and my husband appeared to have a black eye.

The researcher­s had a few explanatio­ns for this.

One is that the software is designed to match you with the face template of someone who looks as much unlike you as possible, pulling from a database of celebrity faces. That usually ends up being a person of the opposite sex, which leads to obvious problems.

“Women get mustaches, and guys get extra eyelashes or eye shadow,” Zhao said. He is enthusiast­ic about what he calls “privacy armor” and previously helped design a bracelet that stops smart speakers from overhearin­g conversati­ons.

The team says it plans to tweak the software so that it will no longer subtly change the sex of users.

But Clearview’s chief executive, Hoan Ton-That, ran a version of my Facebook experiment on the Clearview app and said the technology did not interfere with his system. In fact, he said his company could use images cloaked by Fawkes to improve its ability to make sense of altered images.

“There are billions of unmodified photos on the internet, all on different domain names,” Ton-That said. “In practice, it’s almost certainly too late to perfect a technology like Fawkes and deploy it at scale.”

Other experts were also skeptical that Fawkes would work. Joseph Atick, a facial recognitio­n pioneer who has come to regret the surveillan­ce society he helped to create, said the volume of images of ourselves that we had already made available would be too hard to overcome.

“The cat is out of the bag. We’re out there,” Atick said. “While I encourage this type of research, I’m highly skeptical this is a solution to solve the problem that we’re faced with.”

Atick thinks that only lawmakers can ensure that people have a right to facial anonymity. No such federal law is on the horizon, although Democratic senators did recently propose a ban on government use of facial recognitio­n.

“I personally think that no matter which approach you use, you lose,” said Emily Wenger, a Ph.D. student who helped create Fawkes. “You can have these technologi­cal solutions, but it’s a cat-and-mouse game. And you can have a law, but there will always be illegal actors.”

Wenger thinks “a twoprong approach” is needed, in which individual­s have technologi­cal tools and a privacy law to protect themselves.

Elizabeth Joh, a law professor at the University of California, Davis, has written about tools like Fawkes as “privacy protests,” in which individual­s want to thwart surveillan­ce but not for criminal reasons.

She has repeatedly seen what she called a “tired rubric” of surveillan­ce, then countersur­veillance and then anti-countersur­veillance, as new monitoring technologi­es are introduced.

“People are feeling a sense of privacy exhaustion,” Joh said. “There are too many ways that our convention­al sense of privacy is being exploited in real life and online.”

For Fawkes to have an immediate effect, we would need all the photos of ourselves that we had already posted to be cloaked overnight. That could happen if a huge platform that maintains an enormous number of online images decided to roll out Fawkes systemwide.

A platform like Facebook’s adopting Fawkes would prevent a future Clearview from scraping its users’ images to identify them. “They could say, ‘Give us your real photos, we’ll cloak them, and then we’ll share them with the world so you’ll be protected,’ ” Zhao said.

Jay Nancarrow, a Facebook spokesman, did not rule out that possibilit­y when asked for comment. “As part of our efforts to protect people’s privacy, we have a dedicated team exploring this type of technology and other methods of preventing photo misuse,” Nancarrow said.

“I’m actually interning on that exact team at Facebook right now,” said Fawkes cocreator Shan.

 ?? THE NEW YORK TIMES ?? Original images of reporter Kashmir Hill are at left; “cloaked” versions are on the right.
THE NEW YORK TIMES Original images of reporter Kashmir Hill are at left; “cloaked” versions are on the right.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States