Despite being penned by House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mark Green (R-Tenn.), Friday’s opinion piece urging “an alternative” to facial recognition technology offers a bizarre string of statements that do not make the case.
Each biometric modality (fingerprint, iris, face, etc.) offers advantages that could make it the most effective for a specific purpose. But there are data-backed reasons facial recognition technology is widely adopted — including the ability to use existing hardware (cameras) and photos, rather than requiring specialized equipment and data collection processes.
With rapid improvement through machine learning and neural networks, the leading technologies are now over 99 percent accurate across demographics according to National Institute of Standards and Technology data. Customs and Border Protection selected face recognition for its programs and has since verified more than 697 million travelers of all nationalities and ethnicities. More than 2 million U.S. air travelers use facial recognition technology every day to verify IDs at Transportation Security Administration checkpoints.
Much is made about the risk of fraudsters getting the software to falsely match, but the figures cited are from research limited to unlocking personal phones, and conducted before Face ID was introduced on iPhones in 2017. Since then, presentation attack detection capabilities have been integrated into iPhones as well as higher security biometric applications.
Fake videos, printed photos and masks are not a concern in an in-person setting where human detection of spoofing efforts would be immediate. The potential for fraud is with remote, online verification, where presentation attack detection measures are commonly combined with matching software. Homeland Security’s Science and Technology Directorate is testing these technologies, showing so far, the leading presentation attack detection technologies detect spoofing attempts 100 percent of the time.
Across the nation, facial recognition technology is successfully leveraged in law enforcement to find missing children, fight human trafficking and stop dangerous criminals. It’s unclear how facial recognition technology alternatives would work, when the only evidence from a crime scene may be security video, recordings from by-standers or online media.
We agree, China’s use of technology “to control its citizenry” is unacceptable. But this shouldn’t deter U.S. agencies from leading the way in responsible use of (non-Chinese) technology under established privacy rules, bounded by the Constitution and subject to congressional oversight.
Jake Parker is senior director of government relations for the Security Industry Association (SIA). He came to SIA with more than 12 years of experience on Capitol Hill, most recently as legislative director for Rep. Tom Latham (R-Iowa), a senior member of the House Appropriations Committee.