What Facial Recognition Technology Means for Privacy and Civil Liberties
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
S. HRG. 112–851 WHAT FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY MEANS FOR PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON PRIVACY TECHNOLOGY AND THE LAW OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION JULY 18, 2012 Serial No. J–112–87 Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary ( U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 86–599 PDF WASHINGTON : 2012 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont, Chairman HERB KOHL, Wisconsin CHUCK GRASSLEY, Iowa DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah CHUCK SCHUMER, New York JON KYL, Arizona DICK DURBIN, Illinois JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota JOHN CORNYN, Texas AL FRANKEN, Minnesota MICHAEL S. LEE, Utah CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware TOM COBURN, Oklahoma RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut BRUCE A. COHEN, Chief Counsel and Staff Director KOLAN DAVIS, Republican Chief Counsel and Staff Director SUBCOMMITTEE ON PRIVACY, TECHNOLOGY AND THE LAW AL FRANKEN, Minnesota, Chairman CHUCK SCHUMER, New York TOM COBURN, Oklahoma SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina ALVARO BEDOYA, Democratic Chief Counsel ELIZABETH HAYS, Republican General Counsel (II) C O N T E N T S STATEMENTS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS Page Franken, Hon. Al, a U.S. Senator from the State of Minnesota .......................... 1 prepared statement .......................................................................................... 123 Sessions, Hon. Jeff, a U.S. Senator from the State of Alabama .......................... 4 WITNESSES Witness List ............................................................................................................. 37 Pender, Jerome, M., Deputy Assistant Director, Criminal Justice Information Services Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Justice, Clarksburg, West Virginia ..................................................................... 6 prepared statement .......................................................................................... 39 Mithal, Maneesha, Associate Director, Division of Privacy and Identity Protec- tion, Federal Trade Commission, Washington, DC ........................................... 8 prepared statement .......................................................................................... 44 Martin, Brian, Director of Biometric Research, MorphoTrust USA, Jersey City, New Jersey .................................................................................................. 14 prepared statement .......................................................................................... 57 Acquisti, Alessandro, Associate Professor, Heinz College ad CyLab, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania .................................................... 16 prepared statement .......................................................................................... 63 Amerson, Larry, Sheriff, Calhoun County, Alabama, Anniston, Alabama, on Behalf of the National Sheriffs’ Association ...................................................... 18 prepared statement .......................................................................................... 75 Farahany, Nita A., Professor of Law, Duke Law School, and Professor of Genome Sciences & Policy, Institute for Genome Sciences & Policy, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina ................................................................. 19 prepared statement .......................................................................................... 81 Sherman, Rob, Manager of Privacy and Public Policy, Facebook, Washington, DC .......................................................................................................................... 22 prepared statement .......................................................................................... 92 Lynch, Jennifer, Staff Attorney, Electronic Frontier Foundation, San Fran- cisco, California .................................................................................................... 23 prepared statement .......................................................................................... 100 QUESTIONS Questions submitted by Hon. Al Franken for Jerome Pender, Maneesha Mithal, Brian Martin, Alessandro Acquisti, Rob Sherman, and Jennifer Lynch ..................................................................................................................... 127 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Responses of Jerome Pender to questions submitted by Senator Franken ........ 134 Responses of Maneesha Mithal to questions submitted by Senator Franken .... 137 Responses of Brian Martin to questions submitted by Senator Franken ........... 139 Responses of Alessandro Acquisti to questions submitted by Senator Franken 141 Responses of Rob Sherman to questions submitted by Senator Franken ........... 145 Responses of Jennifer Lynch to questions submitted by Senator Franken ........ 147 (III) IV Page MISCELLANEOUS SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD Face Book, Facebook.com: Approving and Removing Tag, instructions ................................................... 149 Detroit, Michigan, Code of Ordinance, City code .................................................. 150 Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), Marc Rotenberg, Executive Director, Ginger P. McCall, Director, Open Government Program, and David Jacobs, Consumer Protection Fellow, July 18, 2012, joint letter .......... 155 Federal Bureau of Investigation, Richard W. Vorder Bruegge, Quantico, Vir- ginia, report .......................................................................................................... 156 Westlaw, Thomson Teuters: Federal Anti-Protest law, Public Law—112–98, March 8, 2012 ................... 174 Hawaii Anti-Protest law, Title 38, Chapter 852, HRS §852–1 ..................... 176 Illinois Anti-Protest law, Chapter 740, Act 14 ............................................... 179 Maryland Anti-Protest law, Maryland Code, Criminal Law, § 10–201 ....... 185 Michigan law allowing anti-protest ordinance ............................................... 202 Security Industry Association (SIA), Don Erickson, Chief Executive Officer, Alexandria, Virginia, January 31, 2012, letter .................................................. 266 Tag Suggestions, instructions: Windows Photo Viewer ................................. 268 Texas Anti-Protest law, V.T.C.A, Business & Commerce § 503.001 ............ 269 ADDITIONAL SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD Submissions for the record not printed due to voluminous nature, previously printed by an agency of the Federal Government, or other criteria deter- mined by the Committee, list: ............................................................................. 273 EPIC Comments—January 31, 2012.: http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/ facialrecognitiontechnology/00083-0982624.pdf. ............................................... 273 National Institute of Justice (NIJ), William A. Ford, Director, State of Re- search, Development and Evaluation.: T3https://www.eff.org/sites/default/ files/ford-State-of-Research-Development-and-Evaluation-at- NIJ.pdf#page=17. ................................................................................................. 274 Farahany, Nita A., Testimony Attachment—Pennsylvania Law Review: http://www.pennumbra.com/issues/pdfs/160-5/Farahany.pdf. .................... 273 WHAT FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY MEANS FOR PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES WEDNESDAY, JULY 18, 2012 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON PRIVACY, TECHNOLOGY, AND THE LAW, COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Washington, DC. The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:36 p.m., in Room SD–226, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Al Franken, Chair- man of the Subcommittee, presiding. Present: Senators Franken, Whitehouse, and Blumenthal. Also present. Senator Sessions. OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. AL FRANKEN, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA Chairman FRANKEN. This hearing will be called to order. Wel- come to the fourth hearing of the Subcommittee on Privacy, Tech- nology, and the Law. Today’s hearing will examine the use of facial recognition technology by the Government and the private sector and what that means for privacy and civil liberties. I want to be clear: There is nothing inherently right or wrong with facial recognition technology. Just like any other new and powerful technology, it is a tool that can be used for great good. But if we do not stop and carefully consider the way we use this technology, it could also be abused in ways that could threaten basic aspects of our privacy and civil liberties. I called this hearing so we can just start this conversation. I believe that we have a fundamental right to control our private information, and biometric information is already among the most sensitive of our private information, mainly because it is both unique and permanent. You can change your password. You can get a new credit card. But you cannot change your fingerprint, and you cannot change your face—unless, I guess, you go to a great deal of trouble. Indeed, the dimensions of our faces are unique to each of us— just like our fingerprints. And just like fingerprint analysis,