House lawmakers voice ‘serious concerns’ about facial-recognition-using contractor ID.me
3 months ago
Carolyn B. Maloney, chair of the House Oversight Committee, and James E. Clyburn, chair of the House select subcommittee on the Coronavirus crisis, sent a letter to Blake Hall, CEO and founder of ID.me, asking for documents and information relating to the company’s contracts with federal agencies and states.
The 10-page letter, which was first reported by The Washington Post, noted that a number of reports have “raised concerns about ID.me’s performance on government contracts and the effectiveness of its products and services” and that users of ID.me have indicated long wait times to get their identities verified that range “from hours to weeks, as well as other roadblocks that have led to denied benefits.”
Many Americans encountered ID.me — and facial-recognition software — for the first time during the pandemic, as state employment agencies started working with the company to verify users online in hopes of cutting down on a surge of fraudulent claims for state and federal benefits that cropped up alongside a tidal wave of authentic unemployment claims. Ten federal agencies and 30 states use the company, and facial-recognition software is typically used as part of the process to prove that a person is who they say they are. ID.me says it has 81 million users and adds more than 145,000 new ones each day.
ID.me was set to become the sole identity verification tool for taxpayers who want to log in to the IRS’s website — requiring those who wanted to access certain IRS online services to first submit a picture of a photo ID and then take a video selfie with a smartphone or computer so facial recognition software could compare the two. But the IRS halted that plan in February after backlash from privacy groups and lawmakers.
In a statement Thursday, ID.me spokesman Patrick Dornton said, “We look forward to providing important information to the Committee on how ID.me has expanded access to government for disadvantaged Americans, including individuals who do not have credit history, are underbanked, or are without a home.” He added that the company “adheres to the federal guidelines for identity verification and login while providing services to public sector agencies. These standards have proved remarkably effective at preventing fraud.”
The letter asked ID.me to provide the committees with a slew of documents and data by April 28. They include a list of all the federal, state and local government contracts with which ID.me used biometric authentication from 2014 to the present, along with details such as how many users provided face-scan data to the company under these contracts.
Additional requests included details about how ID.me determines if biometric data is “suspicious or fraudulent” and the number of people that used ID.me to verify their identities to access unemployment insurance from March 2020 to February 2022.
The letter also noted how ID.me said as recently as January 24 that it does not use what’s known as one-to-many facial recognition, which attempts to match a photo of a person to ones in a database of faces (the kind of software police might use). But days later, Hall wrote in a LinkedIn post that the company does use one-to-many facial recognition software to check selfies against an internal database of known bad actors.
The lawmakers also asked ID.me for all of its communications with the IRS about one-to-many facial-recognition technology. Treasury spokeswoman Alexandra LaManna said the agency declined to comment.
Facial-recognition software has been criticized by privacy and digital rights groups for years over privacy issues and other real and potential dangers. For instance, such technology has been shown to be less accurate when identifying people of color, and several Black men, at least, have been wrongfully arrested due to the use of facial recognition.
The new probe follows months of criticism of ID.me in particular by privacy advocates and some lawmakers. Even as facial-recognition technology has proliferated and been embraced by law enforcement, lawmakers on both sides of the political aisle have expressed serious concerns about its deployment.
“I am deeply concerned that the federal government lacks a clear plan, leaving agencies like the IRS to enter contracts worth tens of millions of dollars with questionable terms and oversight mechanisms,” Maloney said in a statement. She added that she hopes the investigation “leads to more transparency and accountability in the federal government’s use of facial recognition technology.”
The federal government has no rules regarding the use of facial recognition software. The technology has long been widely used across the federal government and a 2021 report from the US Government Accountability Office noted that agencies were often unaware of how their employees or contractors were using the technology. Some regulations have been passed at the state and local levels, such as in cities like San Francisco that have banned the technology.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept All”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit "Cookie Settings" to provide a controlled consent.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Cookie
Duration
Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.