The Failures Of Facial Recognition Software: Drivers Losing Licenses For Looking Like Terrorists
from the you-know-you're-a-terrorist,-when... dept
Over the years, we've discussed the technological failings of facial recognition software for law enforcement... but they just keep on trying. RichS was the first of a bunch of you to send in the story of the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles suspending licenses due to a match on facial recognition software designed to "detect" terrorists:After frantic calls and a hearing with Registry officials, Gass learned the problem: An antiterrorism computerized facial recognition system that scans a database of millions of state driver’s license images had picked his as a possible fraud.Massachusetts bureaucrats seem positively thrilled with the system, claiming that they're sending out 1,500 suspension notices a day based on such reports. To be honest, I can't believe that they really mean per day, seeing as the article also notes that the facial recognition system only called out 1,000 such matches last year (and then later claims 1,860 licenses were revoked last year because of the software, so the numbers are all over the place). But, still, it sounds like a lot of folks in Massachusetts have to re-prove their identity every day because some computer falsely thinks they're someone else.
It turned out Gass was flagged because he looks like another driver, not because his image was being used to create a fake identity. His driving privileges were returned but, he alleges in a lawsuit, only after 10 days of bureaucratic wrangling to prove he is who he says he is.
Either way, the bureaucrats don't seem at all concerned about relying on a highly questionable system to declare people guilty:
Kaprielian said the Registry gives drivers enough time to respond to the suspension letters and that it is the individual’s “burden’’ to clear up any confusion. She added that protecting the public far outweighs any inconvenience Gass or anyone else might experience.Ah, the logic of clueless bureaucrats.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: driving, facial recognition, massachusetts
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Was History cut out from the curriculum or something?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Anonymous Coward on Jul 18th, 2011 @ 3:38pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Jul 18th, 2011 @ 3:38pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Jul 18th, 2011 @ 3:38pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Jul 18th, 2011 @ 3:38pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Jul 18th, 2011 @ 3:38pm
Ain't that a part of the woman body?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Jul 18th, 2011 @ 3:38pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yes
And we apparently love mindless idiots running our govts. Well, as long as they invoke something with God in it, something to "keep us safe from terrorism", or the name of the latest boogeyman/woman (insert latest Faux News bad person's name here). Other than that, we MAY be sane.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
With that many terrorists identified and getting their licenses suspended, they'll be so effective at crippling the mobility of the jihadists that we can finally bring our troops back from the middle east, thereby saving countless lives without firing a shot! Massachusetts legislators are geniuses!
No doubt without licenses, Al Qaeda will find it quite difficult when they realize that they'll have to start carrying their WMDs around by foot when their cars don't start because their licenses aren't valid. .....wait...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There are 1500 terrorists living in Mass
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: There are 1500 terrorists living in Mass
They must have never encountered an 18 yr old with a fake ID saying they were 21.
They know it is flawed and not working, but it generates a number they can cite in the media.
If your against this program being a waste of money funneled to someone who is paying us a nice kickback and hired my nephew well then your a fing Terrorist!
One wonders how much of the money used to fund this was grabbed as their share of antiterrorism funding.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: There are 1500 terrorists living in Mass
There are 1500 NEW terrorists found EVERY DAY in Massachusetts!
Be afraid, very afraid...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: There are 1500 terrorists living in Mass
WITCHCRAFT IS AT WORK!!! KILL ALL HEATHENS!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: There are 1500 terrorists living in Mass
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: There are 1500 terrorists living in Mass
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: There are 1500 terrorists living in Mass
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: There are 1500 terrorists living in Mass
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
driving
*bangs head into brick wall*
I think it's time I run for President.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: driving
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: driving
I wonder how much lobbying L-1 Identity Solutions had to do to get paid $1.5 million from Homeland Security for software that doesn't actually work?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: driving
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fighting terrorism the American way
What if it really was a terrorist, shouldn't you be arresting them instead? I guess the fact they don't, proves that even the bureautards don't really think they are terrorists.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fighting terrorism the American way
"Sir, we suspect you of a crime. We're not going to go through due process or actually prove you have committed the crime in question because that's too hard/expensive/impossible to prove. But, we're so scared of the crime you might have committed, we'll just go ahead and remove your rights and punish you anyway. If you complain in any way, that just proves your guilt."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Perhaps the most frightening phrase that a bureaucrat can issue these days . . . .
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hmmm...
As of the 2010 Census, the population of Massachusetts was 6,547,629.
divide that by the number of suspensions a day and 365 days a year:
6,547,629 / (1500*365) = 11.95 years.
So in about 12 years nobody can drive in Massachusetts??!?1?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well I for one am glad that they have found and stopped almost 2,000 terrorists, wait what? 0? they found 0 actual terrorists? Oh well then I'm glad......they inconvenienced 1,800 citizens I suppose you gotta stick with what you are good at.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
By that I mean:
1500*365*10=5,475,000
Is this how the government now funds projects, without increasing taxes or relocating funds?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Justice has been there before
The real culprit? A completely unrelated man who almost looked as if he were the innocent man's twin brother. There was even a movie based on this: Blind Justice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Justice has been there before
That's because the police don't spend their time looking for the truth. They pick the easiest/most likely suspect and then devote 100% of their time and efforts to finding a way to prove that he/she is guilty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Guilty until proven innocent
That sure looks like guilty until proven innocent. A presumption of guilt -- bet the prosecutors love it. They can run for re-election in the conviction rate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Guilty until proven innocent
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ahh
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
3 Strike Rule
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Thank you you for your profound contribution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh dear...
Nowdays, states prefer "guilty until proven innocent" carries much more weight than any silly constitutional protections.
I would have thought Mass had better sense.
I live in Mass, so if I don't post again, you will know the found me out and I'm being waterboarded to find out the next location of whatever.
However, how in the heck would I know about it? No one has asked for my DL for years and years. Maybe I should just watch for a black SUV following me around.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
who's the terrorist again?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They're all walking.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Previous Cases.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Mayfield
The FBI's computer artificial intelligence system fed their racist beliefs back at them, and caused the agency to become more than usually delusional. The federal government eventually settled for a couple of million dollars. When the federal government pays that much money, it is a tacit confession of guilt to charges severe enough that a private individual would probably be sentenced to life imprisonment. FBI agents, of course, are "teflon." Nothing sticks to them.
Of course, there was an even worse case, back in 1979, in France. There was a database whose existence the French Government had officially denied. It did exist, however , and it was full of errors, and a policeman, relying on the database, shot a young man in the head. The young man nearly died. The policeman had thought him to be an automobile thief, but he had in fact purchased the automobile from its legal owner.
See: Jacques Vallee, "Problem Scenario," pp. 122-23, in: Gunther R. Geiss and Narayan Viswanathan eds, _The Human Edge: Information Technology and Helping People_, 1986, orig. pub. in Vallee's _The Network Revolution: Confessions of a Computer Scientist_, 1982
Artifical Intelligence systems tend to have a lack of "articulable basis." Going around and shooting people "because they look Jewish" is obviously a criminal act, and probably a terrorist act as well, but AI systems tend to unconsciously embed similar reasoning. Of course, faces move. There are muscles which move the skin around, and consequently, there is a considerable region of unmeasurability. Effectively, computerized facial recognition is pseudo-science.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Expect to be groped - and your kids - and grandma (even if by a random mobile unit)
- Expect to be falsely accused of being a terrorist
- Expect your laptop seized at the border for up to 3 years
- Expect to get arrested if you film police
- Expect to get sued (for pretty much any (im)plausible reason)
- Go to jail for having a garden.. ok maybe not for travelers, but I couldn't leave it out.
Why aren't we all rushing to plan our vacations there? Screw that, I'm heading off to Sweden to get my metal financial help.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let me guess
High ranking state politicians are except from it right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And whatever happened to due process?
I'd hate to be an identical twin in Boston.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is yet another reason why we need due process to be involved in the sending out of notices of drivers license suspension.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Faulty numbers
When the system flags a 1000 (obviously a rounded number) matches, that represents at least 2000 licenses. They will be revoking both licenses if they figure it is fraud and a single person has multiple licenses.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is this about terrorism?
It doesn't make sense to justify vetting licenses via facial recognition software as a defense against terrorism. It seems more likely that some bureaucrat(s) blindly advocated facial recognition license vetting as a weapon against terrorism because it fit into their "one person, one license" mantra and didn't think it through.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lack of numbers, FAR and FRR.
"Neither the Registry nor State Police keep tabs on the number of people wrongly tagged by the system."
They do have the total number of people who were tagged by the system and they do have the number of licenses revoked. If anyone there can subtract, they would immediately have the number of people wrongly tagged. I can see that they would rather not keep track of this problematic number, however, I will attempt to make an estimate.
Massachusetts is using L-1 Identity Solutions' facial recognition system. L1 claims in their website that one of their facial recognition systems (all their products may be based on the same algorithms) came out as "best all around performer" in a National Institute of Standards (NIST) evaluation of facial recognition algorithms in 2006. Unfortunately, it is not clear from the names which one of these is L1's algorithm. Keep in mind that the algorithms may have been improved since 2006. I don't know. This was NIST's most recent facial recognition shootout. Here is the link:
http://www.frvt.org/FRVT2006/docs/FRVT2006andICE2006LargeScaleReport.pdf
The two most important characteristics of biometric identification algorithms are False Acceptance Rate (FAR) and False Rejection Rate (FRR). In this case, FAR covers those cases where two photos of the same person are not identified as identical. FRR applies to cases where the photos from two different people are wrongly identified as identical. It is usually the case that tweaking the algorithm to favor on rate makes the other worse. NIST reports that the best algorithms had an FRR of .01 while holding the FAR at .001. The FAR is a percentage of the total multiple license fraud cases. .001 X (>1000 cases) means there was on average 1 or 2 fraud cases that went undetected. They might have decided to improve this by tweaking the algorithm with the side effect of making the FRR worse. This is actually reasonable considering they further vet the flagged cases with human evaluation. It is interesting to note that the NIST evaluation shows that humans are worse than the algorithms at recognizing that two pictures belong to the same person when that person is not familiar to them. The further vetting that the RMV does probably involves other information than looking at the pictures. The FRR rate given was .01 for the best algorithms. FRR would be a percentage of the total number of licenses issued. It is independent of the fraud rate. The number of licensed drivers in Massachusetts is 4,645,705 (www.statemaster.com). Licenses are renewed every 5 years. Doing the math: .01 X (4,645,705 / 5) = 9291. This is a low number as Massachusetts is also vetting the entire licensed driver database during the next 3 years. It is not clear how much human evaluation reduces this number. There is a potential that thousands of innocent licensed drivers are inconvenienced by having to verify their identity again.
I would suggest, at the very least, that Massachusetts, and any other state doing such facial recognition, be required to officially serve notice (i.e. process serving) when a license is to be revoked
A side note: The NIST 2006 evaluation also covered Iris Challenge Evaluation (ICE). This involves using the iris of the eye for biometric identification. What is interesting is that this report, from a government agency, hints that patents discourage innovation.
"Because of the Flom and Safir patent and the lack of a publicly accessible dataset of images, there was limited research in iris recognition for most of the decade following the publication of Daugman’s algorithm. With the expiration of the Flom and Safir patent, and the availability of the CASIA dataset and the ICE 2005 challenge problem and dataset, research activity in iris recognition has greatly increased in recent years."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why would a genuine terrorist care?
This is stupid even by American standards.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]