Law Enforcement Utilizes Controversial Facial Recognition App Raising Major Privacy Concerns

Concerns about police use of facial recognition technology are increasingly justified, especially with the rise of software such as Clearview AI. Recently, The New York Times reported that over 600 law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and Canada have adopted Clearview AI's system, which can compare uploaded photos—regardless of angle—against a staggering database of over three billion images sourced from the internet, including Facebook and YouTube. While this technology has aided in solving certain cases, it raises significant privacy issues, such as potential misuse against protesters or private individuals.

A major concern is the lack of oversight surrounding Clearview's deployment. There has been minimal public consultation regarding its adoption, and the company’s data protection capabilities remain largely untested. Clearview maintained a high level of secrecy until late 2019, raising further questions. During testing for The New York Times, police were informed to expect inquiries related to their use of the software, highlighting potential privacy intrusions.

Clearview AI's practices may also contravene the policies of major platforms, such as Facebook, which prohibits the mass collection of user images. Facebook has acknowledged the situation and is investigating potential violations.

Hoan Ton-That, the CEO of Clearview AI, has attempted to alleviate privacy fears by claiming that surveillance cameras are not positioned to provide reliable facial recognition and emphasizing that customer support does not review uploaded images. While he noted the theoretical possibility of developing augmented reality glasses with facial recognition capabilities, he stated there are no current plans to pursue such designs.

Despite these reassurances, concerns persist. Clearview’s software has been reported to have only about 75% accuracy and has not been validated by independent organizations like the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology. This inconsistency raises the specter of false matches, as well as potential biases against certain demographics. While it may have been effective in certain contexts, the risk of false accusations or discriminatory targeting remains significant.

In response to these issues, some cities, including San Francisco, have enacted bans on government use of facial recognition technology. The outcry against such surveillance methods is likely to grow as awareness of their implications increases.