Five minutes to make an opening statement. Today the committee is holding our second hearing on the use of racial facial Recognition Technology. We will be examining the use of this technology by Law Enforcement agencies across the federal government. We had a broad survey of full range of issues, raised by technology. We heard from a number of experts about the benefits and the dangers of this technology across government and the entire private sector. Stark conclusion after our last hearing was that this technology is evolving extremely rapidly, without any really safeguards, whether were talking about commercial use or government use, the real concerns about the risks that this Technology Poses to our civil rights and liberties and our rights to privacy. The other conclusion from our last hearing was that these concerns are indeed bipartisan. As we saw at our last hearing, among conservatives and liberals, republic republicans and democrats thats a widerange agreement we should be conducting oversight of the issue to develop common sense, concrete proposals in this area. I truly appreciate the Ranking Members commitment to working together on this issue again in a bipartisan way. Today we will focus on the use of facial Recognition Technology by our government. Our committee has broad jurisdiction over all Government Agencies. So we are uniquely situated to review how different agencies are using this technology on the American People. Today we resident hear from the federal bureau of investigation in april the Government Accountability Office Superintendent a letter to the department of justice with open recommendations on the fbis use of facial Recognition Technology. That letter stated, the fbi had not implemented these recommendations despite the fact that gao initially made them three years ago. Also hear from gao. Nat only on the importance of these recommendations which focus on transparency and accuracy, but also on the dangers associated with failing to implement them. We will also hear from the transportation security administration, which has launched Pilot Programs in the u. S. Airports that subject american citizens to a facial recognition system. Finally, we will hear from the National Institute of standards and technology on this. This has been the standard bearer of Biometric Accuracy for the past 20 years, and this will discuss the state of the technology, the rapid advancement of the technology, and accuracy challenges this Technology Still faces, and future plans for testing and monitoring progress. From all of these relevant actors and building this record of information is important as we begin to stress the use of facial Recognition Technology by both government and private actors and pointly develop legislative solutions. Well continue to hear from additional stakeholders through our subcommittees, each of which is tasked with a specialized focus, such as safeguarding the civil rights and liberties, protecting consumers, examining our governments republic we signatures of this acquisition of this technology and reviewing nantz securely concerns. I look forward to hearing from all of our witnessed today. Now with that i recognize the distinguished the senior Ranking Member of our committee, mr. Jordan for his opening statement. Thank you. I mean it, thank you for his hearing. We fight a lot on this committee, and i think we may have also vigorous debate tomorrow morning but today is a subject matter where we have a lot of agreement and a lot of common ground, and so i genuinely appreciate the chairmans wills nose have a second hearing on this important subject. Two week others we learn some important things. Facial Recognition Technology, there are all kinds of mistakes made when its implemented and those mistakesdive proportionately affect africanamericans the First Amendment and Fourth Amendment concerns when its used by the fbi and the federal government. There are due process concerns when its used by the fbi and the federal government. We learned over 20 states, 20 states have given their bureau of Motor Vehicles, department of motorcycles, the drivers license database given access to that to the fbi. No individual signed off on that when they renewed their drivers license. Didnt sign any waiver its okay to turn my photo over to the fbi. No elect officials voted to allow that to happen. No state assemblies no general aseptember blizzard no bills no governors signing something to say its okay for the fbi to have this information and now we learn when gao did their investigation and study into how the fbi implemented this, there were all kind mistakes the fbi mode how it was implemented. Five recommend that gao says your supposed to follow that the fbi didnt follow and all this happened oh, and its been three years for some of those they still havent investigatedded and fixed those concerns of the gao on facial Recognition Technology, and all of this happened in a country with 50 million surveillance cameras. This is an important subject and i again appreciate the chairmans willingness to have a second hearing and work knowing a bipartisan fashion to figure out what we can do to safeguard americans citizen First Amendment and fourth example Due Process Rightses a we go forward win. That, mr. Chairman, i yield back. Thank you very much. I now want to welcome our witnesses. Mr. Kimberly j. Degreco is the Deputy Assistant director of criminal Justice Information services at the federal bureau of investigation. Greta goodwin the director of Homeland Security and justice at the u. S. Government accountability office. Dr. Charles row rommine is the director of the Information Technology laboratory at the National Institute of standards and technology. And mr. Austin gould is the assistant administrator of requirements and capabilities analysis at the transportation and security administration. If you would please raise stand and raise your right hand. I will swear you all in. [witnesses sworn in] let the record show that the witnesses an net the affirmative. Thank you very much. You may be seated. The microphone are very sensitive so please speak directly into them. Make sure theyre on when you speak, please. Without objection your written statements will be made a part of the official record of this committee. With that, director del greco, youre know recognized to give your statement for five minutes. Thank you, chairman cummings and ranking mesh jordan and the member of the committee. My name is kimber del greg co, the ken diassistant democratic leading the Information Services branch with the fbis criminal Justice Information services division. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the committee. Im testifying today regarding the fbis use of facial recognition for Law Enforcement purpose. It is crucial that authorized members of Law Enforcement and non security communities have access to todays Biometric Technologies to investigate, identify, apprehend, and prosecute toriis and criminals. The fbis next generationesque or ngi system which will yous facial recognition aideness off an to solve crimes. Facial rebelling inning is an investigative tool that can greatly enhance Law Enforcement capabilities and protect Public Safety. At the fbi, trust is crucial. Protecting the privacy and civil liberty s of the American People is part of our culture. This is why when the fbi developed it facial recognition technologies it also pioneered a best set of best practices to Deploy Technology for Public Safety and keeping with the law and without interfering with our fundamental rights. The fbis division has two separate programs using facial recognition. The fbis interstate photo system or ips. Or the fbis facial analysis comparison and evaluation or Face Services ewan. Specially the ngiips allows authorized Law Enforcement agencies the able to use investigative tools of facial recognition by searching criminal mug shots. Law enforcement has put forms, photo lineups for decades. White the practice is not knew the eefficiency of such searches has improved using automated facial recognition if the fbis policy and protest ours emphasize that photo candidates concerned are not be considered positivesque. Thats searches are photos and only result in a ranked listing of candidates. The fbi years of the ngps to follow the implex indication guide and facial Identification Working Group standards for performing facial recognition comparisons. He the policy places legal, training and security requirements on Law Enforcement user odd the ngiips including a prohibition against sitting pro photos obtained without respect to the first and or Fourth Amendments. Photos in the fgiips repository are solely criminal mug shots ainquired by Law Enforcement partner with criminal fingerprints associated with an arrest. The fbi Face Services unit provides Investigative Lead support to fbi offices, operational divisions, and legal at day shays at day chaise bit attaches. And open assessments or active investigations against facial Images Available in state and federal facial Recognition Systems through stepped agreements with state and federal authorities. The Face Services unit only selves photos collected pursuant to the attorney general guidelines, as part of an authorized fbi investigation. And they are not retained. This service does not provide positivesque positive identification but an investigative review. The fbi has taken significant steps to advance the fbis facial Recognition Technology. At the end of 2017, the fbi validated the accuracy rate at all list sizes. In early 2018, the fbi required Law Enforcement users to have completed facial recognition training consistent with the face standards prior to conducting facial recognition searches in the fgiips. Additionally the fbi collaborated to perform the facial recognition vendor test and determined the most viable option to upgrade the current ngips algorithm. It has an accuracy rate of 99. 12 . I would like to thank the men and women of the fbi for their unwaiverring commitment. Im proud to be working alongside so many mission focused staff, protecting the country against horrific crimes. Want to thank the committee for their engage. Ment on this issue. Thank you. Thank you very much. Dr. Goodwin. Children. , armingening member and member offered the committee other. Pleased to be here today to gus gaos work on the fbisy of facial wreck nix telling nothing. This technology has as vannedded quickly and how has wide ranging usage from accessing a smartphone to social media, and to helping law Law Enforcement n criminal investigations. However questions exist railroading the accuracy of technology, transparency in usage and protection of privacy and Civil Liberties when the technology is used identity people based on certain characteristics. Today i will discuss the extent to which the fbi has ensured at hearns to laws and policies related to privacy and transparency, regards the use of face Recognition Technology. As well as whether the fbi has ensured its face recognition capable are sufficiently accurate. I also will provide updates 0 the priority recommendation that gao issued in april of this year regarding this technology. In our may 2016 report, we noted two legally required documents, the privacy Impact Assessment, otherwise known as the pia, and the system of records notice, the sorn were not become published timely. Theyre vote hall i important for privacy to transverse bought the pia analyzes how personal information is collected, stored, shared and manager while the sorn informs the public but the very existence of the systems and the types of data being collected. Among other things, the oj has taken action to implement the Development Pros of the poe o bus hat use yet to up date the process of the srns. We found that the fbi conducted limited assessments of the accuracy of the face recognition searches before they accepted and deployed at the technology for example, the face recognition system generates a list of the requested number of photos. The fbi only assessed accuracy when users requested a list of 50 possible matches and did not test smaller list sizes which mile have yielded different results. These tests did not specifies how often incorrect matches were return. The finn still deployed the the fbi still deployed at the technology. The fbi often uses face Recognition Systems operatessed by 21 state and two federal storm partner enhance the criminal investigations. We reported that the fbi had not assessed the accuracy of these external systems. As a result, they cannot know how accurate the systems are. Yet the fbi keeps using them. Moreover, we found that the fbi did not conduct regular reviews to determine whether the searches were meeting user needs. We made recommendations to address all of these accuracy concerns. Doj has yet to implement the recs. As you are aware, in april of this year, we issued or annual priority recommendations report which provided an overall status of dojs open recommendations and outlined those that gao believes be given high priority. This report included six recommendations related to face recognition. As of today, five of this six remain open. The use of use of facial races concern of the effect tischness of tech until aiding display. The protection of privacy and individual civil libels. This technology is not going away and is it only going to growso it will be important that doj takes step to ensure the transparency of the system so the public is kept informed how personal information is being used and protected, that the implementation of the technology protects individuals privacy, and that the technology and systems used are accurate and are being used appropriately. Chairman cummings, ranging member jordan and members of the committee, this conclude mist remarks. Im i have to answer questions. Temperature, dr. Row rome mine. Im chuck rommine, director of the Information Technology laboratory at the department of commerces National Institute of standards and technology, or nist. Thank you for the aunt to appear before you today to discuss nists role in standards and techest text for facial Recognition Technology. In area of biomitt tries nist has been working with and can private sectors senses. The 1960s and improves the accuracy, quality, usability, interoperatability and consistency of Identity Management estimates and ensures that United States interests are represented in international arena. Nist research has provide state of the Art Technology benchmarks and guidance to industry and u. S. Government agencies that depend upon biometrics recognition. Nist lead national and International Consensus standards activities in biometrics such as facial Recognition Technology but also in crypto graphing, software enand sims reliable and security conformance testing, all essential to access rail the festival deployment of information and communication statements interoperable, rely, securable and usable, i we report gaps and limitations of current bikeow metric wreck nix technologied nist evaluationses a mans measure up signs by provide a scientific basis for what to measure and how to measure. Nist eval weighs also facilitate development of consensus based standards by providing quantitative data for development of scientifically sound fit for purpose standards. Nist conducted the face recognition grand challenge and multiple bryow pet trick dropped challenge to challenge the faithrecognition community to break new grounds, solving Research Problems on the biometric frontier. Since 2000, nists Face Recognition Vendor Testing Program, or frvp, has assessed captain capables of facial recognition algorithms to one to many identification and onetoone verification. Nist expanded the facial recognition evaluation in 2017 to understand the upper hims of human capables to recognize faces and how the capabilities fit into facial recognition applications. Historically and currently, nist biomet tricks research has aced she federal bureau of investigation, the fbi, and department of Homeland Security or dhs. Nists row search was used by dhs in the transition to ten prints for the former u. S. Visit program. Nist is currently working with fbi and the dhs to analyze face recognition capabilities, including performance impact due to image quality and demographics, and provide recommendations regarding match algorithms, optimal thresh holds and matched gallery creation. Nists Face Recognition Vendor Testing Program was seasoned in 2000 to provide independent evaluations of protest to type and commercially available facial reckonings algorithms, significant progress has been made in algorithm improvements since the program was created. Nist is researching how to measure the accuracy of forensic examiners matching identity in different programs. The study measures face identify for professional face examiners working under circumstances brock mating rae world approximating real world case work. The findings published in the proceeding of National Academy of sciences showed that examiners and other human face specialists, including forensic include trained facial reviewers and untrained super recognizer were more accurate than the control groups an challenging tase of Face Identification and presented date comparing stateoftheart facial recognition algorithms with the best human face identifiers. Optimal face knicks was achieved only when humans and machines collaborated. As with all areas for face recognition, rigorous testing and Standards Development can increase productive and efficient . I government and city, stand info vacation and competition, broaden opportunities for international trade, consecutive resources, private consumer benefit and choice, imimprove the environment and promote health and safety. Thank you for the opportunity to testify and id be happy to answer questions. Mr. Gould. Good morning. Thank you for the inviting me before you to discuss the future of buy wrote metrickity at the transportation security admission. Eye the assistant liked to thank the committee forking with tsa as we continue to improve the security of Transportation Systems and particularly for your support of our officers at airbeds nationwide. Tsas stann independent 2001 charged the agency with providing Transportation System security. A key component to perform is the mission is positively identify little passengers boarding aircraft and directing hem to the appropriate level of physical screening. This occurs when passengers enter a check point and present themselves to a security officer. Since its inception tsa has strived to carry out the role as effectively and efficiently as possible using available technology. Recognizing the need to positively identify passengers in an area where fraudulent means ofesque are booking more festival sophisticated and improving performance request protecting passenger privacy. Tsas 2018 biometrics roots map detroit steps the agency is talking to test and potentially expand biomet frick identification capable of tsa check points that can enhance security and improve Passenger Experience the road map has four major goals, part operationallize biometrics for tsa precheck passengers, potentially expand biometrics for additional domestic travelers, and develop the infrastructure to support these biometric efforts. Consistent with the biometrics road map tsa conducted pilots at certain paramounts. They of limited scope and duration and being used to evaluate the applicability of the technology. They have been cited in conjunction with custom border prevention and passengers always have the opportunity to not participate. Standard manualesque process is used. Observed the pilot underway in terminal f in atlanta for international passengers. Of note virtually every passenger chose to use the biometrickesque process. The facial capture camera used for the pilot was in active mode and only captured a facial image after the passenger was in position and the officer activated it. Passengers moved rapidly through the checkpoint. In that regard biometrics represents unique opportunity for tsa. This capable can increase Security Effectiveness by using biometric identification and increasing throughput at the check point and enhanding the passengers experience the able to increase and providing more effective pawningation identification as we see increased passenger voluming growing 4 annually. He experienced the busiest travel day on 24 may, the inned of memorial day week expend screenedll 2. 8 million passengers and crew. Tsas committed to addressing accuracy, private and Cyber Security concerns and in that regard and pursuant to section 19. 19 of the tsa modernization able, dhs will claw report including developed with the support of the directorat. Addressing accuracy, error rates and privacy issues. Looking ahead, tsa plans to continue to build upon its success in past pilot liz conducting additional wounds at select locations and limit it duration to refine requirement of the pilots will be supported by privacy Impact Assessments worried through airport signage and passengers all have the opportunity to choose not to participate. To close, tsa is in the process of systemic systemic assess. Over the apreliminary candle of biopet trick identification at chick points, enhancing savation security also increasing passenger throughput and making air travel more enjoyable experience. They will determine the appropriate level of screening only. It will not be used for Law Enforcement purposes. And as always passengers will have the opportunity not participate. Thank you for the opportunity to address this ender ubefore the committee and i look forward to answering your questions. I now recognize myself. Miss del greco. In 2017, the Government Accountability office testified before our committee that the fbi has signed contracts with at least 16 states to be able to request searches of their photo databases. Gao stated that most of these systems accessed drivers license photos but self states also include mug shot or directions photos. Miss del greco, can you explain how the fbi decides to search a state database versus when it searches its own system and how this policy is determine. I would be happy to explain that. The fbi, we have a Service Called Face Services unit, and they process background checks and process facial recognition searches of the state dmv photos. They do this in accordance with the attorney general guidelines, and Fbi Field Office has to have an open assessment or active investigation. They submit the probe photo to the fbi Face Services unit he we launch the search to the state. The state runs the search for the fbi and provides a candidate list back. With regard to the ngiips, the interstate photo system, the Face Services unit will utilize that prepossesser to as well as the dmv photos, however state and local and federal Law Enforcement agencies only have access to ngi interstate photo system. These are the fbi mug shots associated with a tenprint criminal card associate evidence with a criminal arrest record. Well, do individuals who consent to having their faces in the nondatabase con sent to having their faces search. When applying for a drivers license, does someone consent at the dm v to being in a database searchable by the fbi . The fbi worked del generally with the state representatives in each of the states we have missouri ows and did so under the states authority to allow photos to be used for criminal investigations. We also abided by the federal drivers license Privacy Protection act, and we consider that very important process for us to access those photos, to assist the state and local Law Enforcement in federal agencies joining just just said state Authority Allows you to do this. One question that our Ranking Member has been asking over and over again, is did in these states do any elected officials have anything to do with these decisions . In other words, where is that authority coming from and were trying to figure out with something affecting so many citizens, whether elected officials have anything to do with it. Do you know . I do. Only in one state, the state of illinois, did an elected official sign the mou inch the other states they were done so with the state representatives. This is state law that is established at the state level prior to facial recognition and our program getting started. Were just leveraging the state law. That state law is under place. We did work with the office of general counsel at the fbi and the attorney level at the state level. Well, prior to facial recognition coming into existence. Im just wondering, do you do you think that whatever laws youre referring to, anticipated Something Like facial recognition. Its my understanding that the states seasoned those laws because of fraud and abuse of dryness licenses drivers licenses and were just reviewing each state law and working with the representatives to make sure we can leverage that against criminal. When you say leverage issue guess youre saying that there were laws that were out there, did not these these laws did not anticipate Something Like official recognition, and now the fbi has decided that it would basically take advantage of those laws. Is that right . Is that a fair statement . The federal drivers license Privacy Protection agent allows the state to disclose personality information and including a photo of an image attend in cannabis with a motorcycle record Motor Vehicle record. Host we have seen significant concern amongst certain states about providing this level of access to the fbi. For example, during our made 22nd hearing, we learned that vermont suspended the fbis use of drivers license database in 2017. Is that correct . Im not aware of that, sir. Well, it is accurate. How much states provided this level of direct access to the fbi. We do not have direct access with submit a probe to the state. Theres 21 states. 21 states, you what we did, sir in the last you years since the last oversight harig hearing our office of own general reviewed every ow to make sure it met the state and federal authorities. Does the fbi have plans to increase the number of stateses that provide the fbi with access to the database. Thats up to the states. We have reached out to all the states but its up to them and state authorities and if they wanter to data used. Of states aware the fbi policies when searching their systems and many any changes that are made to these policies. It is made extremely clear to each of the states how the information will be used, the retention. We purge all photos coming back to us from the state. We ask that the state burn all of the appropriate photos probe photos. Oh do you make them aware. We have active discussion asks then in the mou, sir. Is the fbi undergoing any current negotiations to expand the Information Available for fbi Face Services, photo searches . If so can you please describe the negotiations. Im not aware of any current negotiate negotiations right now. We also heard reports that the fbi can search photo databases of 0 other agencies including the department of state. There are any limits to this access . The searches of the state departments putt are in accordance with an active fbi investigation and are only done so under the attorney general guidelines follow by the fbi. Can the fbi perform a face recognition search for any american with a passport . For open and assessment or an active investigation, opt by the fbi, sir. Thank you for binging this important tissue the for runt. We dont have forefront. I know we dont havent Border Patrol here and their use of the facial regular nick to meet the congressional mandate for biometrics and i know theyve head hahad some success. Im from the state of arizona and the department of transportation uses this technology to combat fraudulent drivers license applications. Can you give us a little bit moore inference and details on the successes with partners you have been working with . Miss del greco . The successes that we have had are with majority with state and local Law Enforcement. The fbi is not a positivesque. It provides investigative laws for Law Enforcement and to our Fbi Field Offices. Some of this successes are assisting with this catcher of the terrorists in boston, assisting with the butting the pieces together to identify where a pedophile is that was trying to avoid the Law Enforcement for 20 years, and also assisting in identifying a person that was on the ten most wanted list for homicide. Mr. Gould. Our greatest success in terms of partnering has been with customer and border system. Were doing this solely in a pilot basis but the results have indicated a very high positive match rate and its increased through our check points. Mr. Romine, at our last hearing we heard some curbing facts about accuracy of facial recognition. Can you give us some idea about from what you see, how or going to be able to be much more accurate that application . Yes, sir. The most recent ducting demonstrates significant improvement over previous tests we conducted tests in 2014 2010 and 2014 in, and demonstrate certain limitations soed with facial recognition accuracy. The most recent test results will be published this month for the frvt one to many evaluation being raided, but the results so far suggest substantial increases in accuracy across the board. What sort of accurate saturates offending the different algorithms matching. The accuracy rates were seeing, we have many different participants participants who submitted algorithms. 70 participant inside our testing the best algorithms are performing at a rate ofll 99 been 7 in terms offing a 99. 7 in terms of accuracy. Theres still a wide variety or wide variance across the number of algorithm so this is not comityized yet. Of of the best algorithms in the 99 to 99. 7 category. There are algorithms you testes that you would recommend for Law Enforcement . We dont make recommendations about specific algorithms. We provide the data necessary for making informed decisions about how an algorithm will perform in a field, so for Law Enforcement, for for example, accuracy rates are one important aspect that needs to be considered but there other aspect have to be taken into conversation for procurement or acquisition. Going back to the develop of algorithms, the bias can be built into those that are manufactured or billing the algorithms. Isnt that true. It is true that the algorithms depending on the way that they have been developed, can have bias associated with them. The in many cases the improvement we see in the performance of these algorithms, the dramatic improvement, comes from a transition that the Vendor Community and participant community have made to deep learning algorithms, the Machine Learning algorithms that are what has made the difference. Now, let me be clear, we tested these we evaluate these as black boxes and my assertion there is from discussions that we have had with vendors and not from examination of the algorithms. Thes and the like to algorithms determines the level or bias that may exist went the algorithms themselves. I thank the chairman. Mr. Lynch. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you for hole thing second hearing on facial recognition if i thank the rank member as well. Its good to have bipartisan on this issue. Miss del greco i understand the at play when theres an active fbi investigation ongoing and youre reviewing mug shots of known criminals, but mr. Gould, according to the biomet tricks road map released by tsa in september of 2018, tsa seeks to expand the use official Recognition Technology to, quote, the to general flying public, close quote in specific lopes indications but the general flying public, and tsa envisions the use of technology upon domestic flights as well as international which would capture the faces mostly american citizens and whats the legal basis im not talking about a situation with the fbi where you might have you hopefully would have probable cause. Where does the tsa find its justification, its legal justification, for capturing the facialoid identity of the flying park. In accord wednesdayive the Aviation Transportation security act of 2001, tsa i charged with positively identifying passengers boarding aircraft. Let me just stop you right. The all fly at least a couple of times a week. So, we have now you have to have a certified license. You cant go with the old version that your state had. Now we have much more accurate licenses. We surrender that. Often types in the airport during the boarding process you have to show its couple of times, ticketing issues there so youre doing that right now. You have been doing that a long time manually. Right. So now your saying that youll do these Pilot Programs and just her people youre saying voluntarily but i can imagine, luke you have done with precheck, you can either agree to surrender your right to anonymity and wait in the long line or you can give up your fourth end right monday and go in the quickly. Is that the dynamic. With respect to expanding to the general traveling pock we anticipate using a onetoone matching capability of checkpoint. Bruise your credential. Stick it in a machine and the machine determines whether your image matches the image imbedded in democrat chan shall and should you desire not participate you have the option to do that process manually. To match you have to have that dat in the on board the technology match something with, right. That data is imbedded inure credential the photographs is on your driss license, theres a digital recording of that nick the credential and when your picture is captured be the camera its match with the forecast on the credential. Thats the identification we use for the broader traveling puck. You dont expect to use a gathering dabs dab of information within tsa to identify passengers. For international tramp with a photo and precheck passengers well match them to a gallery but for the general traveling public that does not participate in the programs and merely has a cred dep shall wheat the side of the gallery . Anybody engages in International Travel, are they in there order foreign nationals who travel to the u. S. . Sir, the gallery we use right now with tbs includes anyone traveling internationally and has a photo on record. Here the problem. We had a problem with opm and we had 20 million individuals, their personal information, sort security numbers, everything they submitted with on federal documents to opm, and stolen by we think the chinese. Im just curious and concerned that we dont have great track record here in protect peopleseesque. Something we take very obviously. I hope. So my time expired. Yield lack. Mr. Higgins. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for appearing before your committee today. Mr. Chairman, i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a document from the Security Industry association and association for Cyber Security providers can just a general knowledge document. Without objection so ordered. During this emerging Technology Era of digital technologies, i think its important that we refer to technologies we have had existing for excite some time, in 2005, as a police officer, we had in the city of patrolled, we had access to a camera that was dis a series of cameras disguised as a transformer on an electric pole, where we had large numbers of complaints and crimes and portions of the city, and the citizenry themselves, want these crimes solved and investigated. We would have the linemen for the Electric Company install this camera and we would solve many crimes. Crimes would go down. This was 15 years ago. We have license plate readers right now. Madam, gentlemen, ike sure your familiar with license plate reader. He use them from sea to shining sea. If your vehicle is on a public road and, its subject to license plate reader and the cameras are not available to just Law Enforcement but any citizen can invest theyre quite expensive can read the license plate and cross referenced to dz now exactly what vehicle passed in front of that camera. These cameras have been used to successfully investigate and solve crimes. So of them heinous crimes. Crimes in the scores of thousands across the country. I have in my home 11 smart cameras. Theyre connected to software, the High Resolution digital cam threaps software interpret the imagery to determine if its a familiar person or not. If its a familiar person, that the cameras have learned is a commonality visitor my home or myself or my wife, my son, et cetera, then theres no alert sent to the security company. If its not a familiar person, then a human being receives a control and looks at that camera feed to my ohm. I this is technology that exists and we all have. Everyone here wants to protect Fourth Amendment rights and privacy rights of american citizen rhythm none of us want our constitutional protections violated. But the fact is this emerging technology after facial recognition is coming and its reflecting just the advancement or our digital technologieses that we have already employed across the country and deployed in public areas, including airports. In a chance for abuse. Would you concur . We feel that at the fbi that following policies procedures are extremely important. Thank you. These are human beings following policies and proceed sures. Correct . We require all state and local authorized state and local Law Enforcement entities to adhere to the required training thank you, maam. The technologies that were viewing, these cameras dont they dont make it a do they . They just add to the data of a case file or the strength of an investigation and then a human being, an investigator, must follow up on that and determine of you have probable cause for arrest, is that correct. Our system doesnt capture realtime a probe photo has to be submitted to by Law Enforcement and have to have authority to access our system for a Law Enforcement purpose. The concern of this committee as it should be is the potential abuse of this technology, and i believe the point that we should clarify, in our remaining ten seconds human beings are ultimately in control of the investigative effort and that the technology that is viewed is part of a much larger totality of circumstances in any criminal investigation. Would you concur with that, mam. For the fbi were very struck on the use of our system and the authorities that are provided to those Law Enforcement entities. Thank you, madam. Mr. Chairman my time expired. What do you mean by snicket since the last incarceration 2017 the we take this seriously, sir. He went out sad ricery policy board of over hundred state, local texas ralph entity asks talk to the bum the gao tipped examination collecting photos against the first and Fourth Amendments. We require state and local and federal and tribal entities to have training to submit a photo to the ngiips. We restrict the access unless their authorized and we pout the ngi policy and implementation guide and told the states they must follow the standards identified in the facial identification science tim working group. Mr. Want to thank you and the Ranking Member for con doubling this hearing and he conducting this hearing and the witnesses for being here. Let me start with the gao record amend inside may of 2016 that the fbi made changes to ensure transparent of the use of facial wreck nix telling nothing. In time 19 the georgia re the georgia released a letter to he department of justice highlight knowledge recommendations and recommending if quote, doj determine why, number one, privacy Impact Assessments and, two, a system of record notice were not published as required and implement corrective actions , end of quote. Doj did not agree with either recommendations and the fbi still has not fully implemented the two open recommendations offered by gao. Dr. Goodwin, can you explain the importance of transparency when it comes to the fbis use of facial Recognition Technology . Yes. Thank you, sir. So, as you mentioned we made six recommendations, three of them related to privacy, three related to accuracy. Only one of those has been close as implemented. The ones we made related to privacy and accuracy focus on the privacy Impact Assessment and that is a requirement under the egov act of 2002 that psbs bow condition doubted the help determine the privacy implication and evaluate protections and the doj has disagreed with that. We know they are concerned about privacy and transparency but disagree with our recommendation. These are legally required documents that they have to submit. So they have to submit the pia and the srn. The srn is required under the privacy sackett and that provides information anytime thats a change to system or the technology, they have to make that information publicly available so that the public knows what is going on, and so we stand behind those recommendations because those speak to transparency and those speak to privacy. To this date, those documents have not been made. Thats correct. So, miss del greco, can you explain why the fbi disagrees with the transparency focus recommendations . I believe doj disagrees with gaos assessment of the legal requirements. The fbi did publish both the pia and the srn. Initial developments of the face recognition we had privacy interns imbedded in our process to develop the protocols and procedures, and we have submitted updates, continuous updateddated to pio and srn. What steps do you take to protect privacy when conducting face recognition searches . The fbi monitors the appropriate audits with audits of the state, local and federal and tribal entities and look at four system requirements emwe provide outreach to years and to date we have not had any violations or notice from the public they feel like their right are violated. To what extent do you share the steps you take with the public . So those with regard to the pia and srn those are on ball of the department of justice and i have to take that question back you. Will you get back to us. Yes, sir. I am concerned the fbi is not fully complying with the notice requirements when it comes to the use of facial recognition. When the fbi arrests an individual based on a lead generated by face recognition, does it notify a defendant of the fact . So those are felony assessments or active investigations, and theyre done so conforming conforming and foe attorney general guidelines and not would be for an active fbi investigation. So how many times has the fbi provided notices to criminal defendants that face recognition was used in their case . As part of a criminal investigation i dont believe thats part of the process. What about when it gets to trial . Or gets through discovery. The fbis Face Services unit thats the department i represent in clarkburg, west virginia, we provide a candidate back to the Fbi Field Office, two or more candidates and they make the determination whether that is a match or not or theyre a person of interest theyre looking for. So does the fbi provide other candidate matches to the defendant as part of brady evidence or discovery . Im not aware of any other information other than a candidate back from a search of the facial the ngi interstate photo system. What steps are the fbi taking to ensure that its use of the technology is as transparent as possible by assuring proper notification . The fib provides policy and procedures out to state and local entities they must follow, and they have to follow the standard we established and they have to make shower they do so in accordance with authorized Law Enforcement purposes. So how does the public know whether their face image might be subject to searches you conduct . The Law Enforcement entity would have to have the authority to do so for criminal justice purpose. In order to access the ngi interstate photo system. I see. All right. My time is expired. Yield back, mr. Chairman. Mr. Jordan. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Did the fbi riot all requiremented thereof egovernment law . So is a mentioned earlier, the pia is whats the egovernment meet all the requirements . I was looking for yes or no meet all the requirement. No. Did still have open recommendations. I understand. Dithe fbi publish privacy impact assess a timely fashion when it implemented frt in 2011. No. Did the fbi follow proper notice, file proper notice, specifically city tim of record notice in a timely fair, when it implemented facial Recognition Technology . No. Did the fbi conduct proper testing of the next generation interstate photo system when it implemented frt . Proper in terms of dorming accuracy . Yes. No. Did the fbi test the accuracy of the state systems its enter fated with in. No. So let in the just to be didnt follow the law, the egovernment law. Didnt file proper privacy ick pact assessment noticeses, didnt provide timely notice, didnt conduct proper testing of the and imdidnt check the accuracy of the state system it was going to enter fate with. Bright . Those five things they didnt do. Thats correct. But miss del greco says me have district standards. We have memorandums of understanding with the protect spifftive states but when they started the system, stood up the system, there were five key things they were supposed to follow, that the cant, and my understand is they still havent investigated those. Is that accurate. That is correct. So they system havent ticket exs the five things they were supposed to do when the first start. Five open recommendations. But were supposed to believe, dont worry, everything is just fine. And we havent even gotten to the fundamentals yet. The first or Fourth Amendment just talking about the process for implementing standarding up the system. Miss del greco, you said earlier to the chairman i thursday used the word strict policies we follow. How are we supposed to have confidence in strict policies youre going to follow wheney depend follow the rules when thank you set the thing up in the first place. The fbi published both the pia and the srn, the department of justice disagrees with gao how the interpret the legal assessment of the you dave agree in one area or off file. I believe in the the years of the findings. You have five problems. The arrange cure si was test offed of the system. We disagree with gao and since the last hearing in 2017, the fbi went back and we evaluate our current algorithm again at all list sizes and the accuracy boasted above a 90 percentile. We care about the accuracy of the system and the test can. Earlier you said when the chairman was asking you some questions, you said there are folks who sign memorandums of understanding between someone at the fbi and one in the 21 respective states that allow access to databases. Who are the people signing the document, signing away the right offered the systems in their respective states . Who are those individual. Or office of general counsel works with the state representatives in the state that garner those authorities. Not state representatives in the sense theyre elected to general assembly. Some person designated by somebody to sign away i know the ohio, i think i said this, we have 11 named people in our state. My guess is 10 million, nine million, of them dream so someone is signing april ang so those peoples picture and Everything Else in the database. Who is that individual. The state authorities are public documents that anyone can get access to he work with the appropriate state officials. We review those documents very carefully. We talk about the use of the data, and we make sure theyre in accordance with our federal drivers license Privacy Protect act was wellment. Mr. Chairman, again, i just come back to basics, if five key things are supposed to do when they start implementing the system, i think dating back to 2011 if i read crequely, that they didnt follow, and yet were supposed to believe dont worry. Dont worry. Everything is just fine. All this happening in an environment as we said earlier and learned two weeks ago, an environment where there are 50 million surveillance cameras crowned the country parent the chairmans willingness to have a second here and willing floss work with the Minority Party where we go down the road. What is your disagreement by the way with gao . You said theres a disagreement. What is it . With regards to privacy . Yeah, yes. Doj, i understand, disagrees with he legal set0. The pia and srn and reporting and such but i would have to take that back to doj to respond. Would you do that for us. I will. Miss maloney. Thank you, mr. Chairman and thank you and the ranking dismember panelists for being here on this important hearing. I have read that facial Recognition Technology is susceptible errors that can eave grave ram fission indications for certain ramifications for certain vulnerable populations and its more difficult to recognize women and minority. Id like private meeting with members that are interested in this on why this was reported, if it was reported correctly. What i want to do is follow up on the Ranking Members questions on really the scope and accountability of this program. So miles an hour del greco, how many searches has the fbi run in the next generation i. D. Interstate photo system . How much searches . Is a result of the system is useful. We do ask our state and local to provide feedback on the services that we provide. To date we have not received any negative feedback. Have they said it has been successful . Can you get back to me in writing. There is one thing not getting any feedback, is there any proof that this system has been helpful to Law Enforcement in any way . Has it led to a conviction . How many of the fbi searches have led to arrest and convictions . I do not. How many of the fbis searches have led to the rest of innocent people . For facial recognition, the Law Enforcement entity must have authorized access to our system my question was how that led to the arrest of any innocent people . Yes or no. Not to might acknowledge maam. Are you tracking the number of searches that led to the arrest . You dont know anything about any innocent person being arrested . Our system is not built for identification. Maybe we should change the system. We need accountability if this is working or not. Or if its just abusing people. And what i read contains over 600 million photos of individuals that are primarily of people who have never been convicted of a crime. My question is, why does the fbi need together photos of innocent people . We do not have innocent people or citizens in our database. We have criminal mugshots with criminal arrest. My information that i read in the paper must be wrong. I will follow up with a letter for clarification because i was told yes 600 million in your database of innocent people. It is extremely important that we know the use of this technology. And to determine whether there is a crime, helping to solve or are we just weighing in on Constitutional Rights of people in creating constitutional risks. We cannot know unless this is a database that Law Enforcement uses. My question is, what are the current reporting requirements regarding the fbi use of facial Recognition Technology. Is there any oversight, reporting requirements for the use of this technology . The fbi monitors appropriate issues. You have a database that tracks whether or not this is working, helping Law Enforcement arrest people, is it arresting innocent people, is it keeping information on innocent people, the other data piece that tells us what this program is doing and what the benefit for a panel to your tour society. No we do not. I think you should have one. And i am very concerned about appearing in the American People deserve Government Holding and i actually agree with the questioning of the Minority Party leadership and you dont have answers on how its working, how would set up, what is going on whether turning or helping people. You dont have information of whether its dating Law Enforcement and their goal for putting down terrorists. We need more accountability and yield back. I want to recognize this tumor consult Country Technology association be back without objection. Thank you, mr. Chairman. He reported on the accuracy of algorithms that this test is 99 99. 7 accurate. First of all, that accuracy rating, i imagine two ways the algorithm fails. One will be a false positive in one would be to recognize. So let me double check because they want to be sure i get this right. The accuracy of 99. 7, i believe is false negative but i will have to double check and get back to you. The jew test certain conditions . There is an impact on twins in the database and the testing whether they are identical twins or even fraternal. I have two sons he can open his brothers funds. They look like brothers. He changes the shape of his mouth to the way he thinks his brother looks and he opens every single time. And that is not 99 , that is 0 . That might be an older algorithm in a couple years since this happened. I went to submit for the record in article by Thomas Brewer called we broken to android phones with the 3d printed head. I think these are not as accurate for certain conditions like somebody wearing a mask that accuracy does not approach or may not approach 99 with some of these algorithms. The situations youre describing are situations where there is an attempt to deceive either through lack of lightness. That is what we are worried about. His intent to deceive, not the honest actor. That may go to Something Else here. This question is for ms. Del greco. The Supreme Court case brady v maryland held the Due Process Rights require government to promptly evidence with the defense so in the case where multiple photos are returned or there may be nine possible matches, the defense get access or knowledge that there were other possible matches . The me give you an example. In a prior hearing i heard somebody testify to us that assures office gave an example where a person was 70 confident was the person they ended up charging even though the algorithm thought somebody was at 90 confidence. So they charge a person that the algorithm said was 70 likely and passed over the one that was 90 likely in this case. Can you guarantee that the fbi would provide that type of information to the defense . First they do not make a match. We provide an Investigative Lead to our Law Enforcement partners but with all evidence obtained during an investigation. We provide more than one lead. It depends on the state system. Does the defense get access that there was other leads and you design a probability or confidence level without facial recognition . I think the team must determine on a casebycase basis. Youre not sure if they would get that . No im not. We dont provide a true match it is up to the Law Enforcement entity to make that decision. Quick question, how many photos does a database have access to including the state drivers license databases . That changes daily. Millions questioning tens of millions questioning. Do you have access to kentuckys database . I can check for use or. We do not yesterday. You have access to all the photographs in the drivers license to establish the mou and not an elected official. It is predetermined and established prior to face recognition. You say the laws were passed before facial recognition became . They were. I think that is a problem. Thank you very much. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Doctor goodwin in may of 2016 the geo made six recommendations to the fbi three related to privacy and one was implemented in three to accuracy. Can you talk about briefly the five that were not yet implement to . The three related to privacy focused on developing the process so its more aligned with the requirements. The other one focuses on publishing in a timely manner. So developing the process for the thorn in making certain those are published in a timely fashion. The other three are accuracy related in there about testing and expanding the candidate list, weeks of issue and the fact they did not test the smaller list size. That is one of them. The other one is assessing whether the ips needs their needs. Thats an accuracy concerned. The other one focuses on the face database making certain those are also meeting needs. Those relate to accuracy and speaks to the conversation. The information ipi is using that information needs to be accurate especially after using them for their criminal investigations. Its important that it needs to be accurate. These were made three years ago. That is probably a question better for the fbi. Ill come around. You stated 99. 7 plus accuracy but that is specific algorithms and when you look at the breath of algorithms that are used, i assume based on your statement that there are accuracy rates much lower than that depending on the algorithm, can you elaborate . The range of performance in terms of accuracy for the algorithms is pretty broad. Some of the participants have made substantial progress and remarkably accurate algorithms in terms of the 99 and above for false negative rates. Others are as much as a bout a 60 fold less accurate than that. Those are from a variety of sources including a university algorithm for research and participation. Im going to ask you this, is there data showing facial recognition accuracy versus traditional photographs and enhance photography . Im not sure i understand your question. Whether its oldfashioned technology of using photographs versus facial recognition, is there any data that we have available that shows facial recognition as a large step in the right direction even with the challenges were having here . We have test, Human Performance and facial recognition through comparison of photographs. Interestingly what we find i refer to my testimony, if you combined to humans you dont do much better than anyone individually. If you combined to algorithms you dont do better than it either individually. If you combined a human and a facial recognition you do substantially better than eith either. Going to you, we would like to piggyback as to why the fbi has not implemented the five recommendations. To recommendations regarding the pia and the thorn, d. O. J. Disagrees with the legal assessment, the publication. We had privacy attorneys embedded in our process of the whole time, we published that and we continue to update those accordingly and we provided updates to gao. With regard to the candidate list size, since the last hearing in 2017 the fbi conducted a test of our current accuracy in the system at all list sizes and we are able to validate that the percentage was higher than what we published in 2017. If a bad actor with bad intentions in the skill set to use, doesnt that circumvent this entire process . We provided candidate and we use trained fbi examiners as we alluded, the system combined with the train fbi examiner provides a better response back to the Law Enforcement entity. Thank you are you back. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Does the fbi use realtime face recognition on live video feeds or have any plans to do so in the future . No we do not have the fbi ever experimented with face recognition . Not to make knowledge. Do any of the fbi partners utilize our plan to utilize realtime face Recognition Technology . Not for criminal Justice Purposes. Does the department of justice believe fbi have Statutory Authority to do realtime face recognition itself . Not to my knowledge. Does the department of justice believe they have Statutory Authority to give states grants that would support face recognition . No, sir. Please name the companies who lobby or communicate with your agencies about face recognition products they like to provide. We have the testing that we have done but those are the only agencies that were familiar with and we would differ to the vendors that participated in the facial recognition vendor test in 2018. The prototyping with cbp uses nec camera and matching algorithm by nec. Nec would be the company. That the committee were working with, yes, sir. , air passengers have participated in tsa face recognition pointless . I would have to get back to you with a number on that for the record. You cannot tell us how many participants or u. S. Citizens . No, sir. Underwent Statutory Authority does ta say use facial technology on the market citizens . We use the authority of the transportation security act which requires to identify passengers who are boarding aircraft and proceeding to the checkpoint. Can you tell me what the authority tsa uses for face Recognition Technology on domestic travelers generally . I would say its the same authority of transportation security act. Does tsa have any plans for realtime face Recognition Technology and airports . If you mean realtime bifacial capture and matching at the checkpoint, then yes thats what were pursuing. Has tsa consider the privacy of realtime face Recognition Technology . Yes, absolutely. We do privacy impacted assessments and they clearly identify that we are using facial Recognition Technology in a pilot manner traded five passengers and we dont store any photographs on the camera. Will travelers be able to opt out . Yes, sir the always have an opportunity to not participate in the program. You think thats true now and into the foreseeable future . Yes, sir. With face Recognition Technology at additional points and airports beyond security checkpoint questioning. We are prototyping facial Recognition Technology backdrops so when you drop a bag off to be placed on aircraft we can reexploring facial technology there and for tsa purposes only other locations are checkpoint. I yield. Let me come back, if you are doing backdrops, that is not oneonone comparison. What are you comparing it to . If you are looking at taking facial recognition at bag drop, there would not be necessarily an identification youre talking my earlier, what Pilot Program are you working with for that . The one in place as Delta Air Lines and tsa and elaine to internal malt left, its a matching of the passengers back to the photograph on the system. That contradicts earlier testimony. What you said you were doing is just checking the biometrics within the identification against official recognition but it sounds like youre doing a lot more than that. This is for International Travelers. I just came through jfk, i did not see any of the signs you are talking about. And what im saying, what Statutory Authority gives you the ability to do that. Among the Transportation Committee and we never envisioned any of this and am looking at the very statue myself here and how can you look and suggest that the statue gives the ability to invade the privacy of american citizens . You may answer the question. With respect to the pilot in atlanta, its International Travelers, and the purpose of the pilot is to positively match using biometrics the passenger to the bag at the bag drop. The travelers cannot photograph images captured and transmitted to the system for matching and returns a match result, thats it no privacy information or any other data. With respect to jfk there is no pilot going on right there now. Its holy and alanna in terminal f. Thank you, mr. Chairman and i want to follow up on these questions. Does the tsa report how Many American citizens faces it captures during the pilot and if so do you know the numbers . I do not know the numbers id have to smith that for the record. Yes please. Tsa uses the facial Recognition Systems of custom and border protection, cbp which may not restrict how private corporation use passenger data. According to an august 28 teen article they quote has said it cannot control how the company uses the data because not collecting photographs on their behalf. An official stated that he believed commercial carriers had no interest in keeping or retaining the biometric that they collect and the airlines have said they are not doing so. But if they did, he said that would be up to them. Tsa has said it intends to pursue innovative models of publicprivate partnerships to drive collaboration and coinvestment. Tsa uses the system to scan the faces of american citizens how can it ensure the private data of these passengers is not stored or sold by private airlines . I have to refer to cbp for the security in the privacy of the system. With respect to the public partnership, when we refer to that we are talking about partnering with industry ai airlines solely on the front and capture system. So basically cameras are being utilized. But you talk about coinvestment . In accordance with tsa authorities, we are allowed to enter into agreement with airports or airlines for quic equipment on her behalf. That would be the camera system only. Solely for the capture, the matching and the database is a government system and right now we uses cbp tbs system. Have you thought about how you would into the private data is not stored or sold . Absolutely. When your photo is captured at checkpoint in the pilot is encrypted and sent off for matching. The database that they use, that is cyber secure and applicable standards. We do not transfer any private or identifiable information between us and the airlines. Doctor goodwin, what regulations do believe should be put in place to prevent the abuse of passenger data by airlines and private companies . We would not have an answer to that question. The way we think about it, we have issued recommendations related to privacy and accuracy and if those recommendations are implemented that will go a long way to meeting the needs of the public and the memes of this committee. Sorry can incorporate we believe the remaining five are implemented that would go a long way to answer the questions and addressing the concern around privacy that are being collected. And something preventing tsa from incorporating those questioning. As i stated before was section 1919, we have executed in conjunction with the privacy impact associated with biometrics identification at the airport as well a security concerns associated with that. That report will come from dhs in the near future. The Washington Post stated that 25000 passengers traveled through terminal each week and according to the article only about 2 of travelers opt out. And assuming the system is used by tsa are 99 accurate which are likely not, the highvolume would still mean hundreds of passengers are inaccurately identified each week. This tsa keep track . The pilots were capturing match rates in nonmetric with respect to the numbers of americans that do not turn a positive map trait i would have to submit something. Please do. What would be the most effective way for tsa to measure how accurate the systems are when testing the identity of the market citizens . We are not expert in testing. , we test algorithms and we evaluate the algorithms for accuracy of matching the entire system is outside my purview. A person understand the value but i think we need to have clear regulations and guidance that are essential to prevent the abuse and protect privacy and why a perso appreciate the recordations i think we need more to make sure to implement it. I yield back. Mr. Roy. Thank you, mr. Chairman i appreciate it. Thank you to my calling from georgia for letting me go now. I appreciate you guys taking the time to testify today. I appreciate your service termination. And the federal prosecutor a per sheet the commitment to Law Enforcement and what to do to keep the United States and its citizens safe. I think theres been very important issues with privacy rates on both sides of the aisle and i appreciate you addressing those concerns one of the questions is my calling from michigan, asking about realtime use of this technology and i want to explore that a little bit further and maybe not all that important question. Is United States government in any way based on the knowledge of anybody at the table using facial Recognition Technology on american citizens without their knowledge today . And if so, where in how . The systems are not designed for realtime capture. To your knowledge United States government is not using facial Recognition Technology to capture information from american citizens and using and processing it without their knowledge . The fbi does not. We require it for criminal purpose only. In accordance with Law Enforcement. With respect to tsa, were doing it solely with the passengers consent the cameras are visible in the passenger needs to assume a position in front of the camera for facial capture. Any other witnesses . We are not in the work that we have done is beyond the sco scope. Is outside of the scope. Are there any plans to use the Technology Without consent of an american citizen . Not with tsa. Outside of a common purpose . You said in response in one of his questions about realtime use, not for criminal Justice Purposes. Can you explain and expand on that . We only collect the photo in conjunction with criminal justice. Our Law Enforcement partners, state and local entities must be authorized to have access to our system and they must have a criminal justice purpose in order to search our system, the interstate photosystem. I will yield to my calling from louisiana. I think my colleague for yellinyielding a bit of his tim. Theres 10,554,985 criminal arrests were made and we ran about 59 conviction. I think the American People witnessing must be reminded that every american that is arrested has been arrested by probable cause and the standards of probable cause are much less then conviction is that true . That is correct. With a robert of evidence be used on the course of a criminal investigation in any Technology Including facial Recognition Technology, without be added as a tool in the toolbox to add of strength or weakness . State and local entities have the option to submit a probe photo in accordance with the criminal investigation. Moving quickly, my colleague mentioned theres a 77 match and thus a subject that was arrested versus a 90 match that was not arrested. Does not arrested me not investigated . I am not aware of that. We provide candidates back during the course of a regular investigation is rebuttal suspicious grounds for any citizen . Im not a lawenforcement officer. Im, and it is. Probable cause is a standard for rest beyond a reasonable doubt or shadow of a doubt is a standard for conviction and i very much appreciate everyones testimony today, this is an emerging technology, mr. Chairman and mr. Ranking member we should watch this technology closely and protected for american citizens, we should also recognize that this can be a very valuable tool for Law Enforcement and to fight crime in our country and i yield. Mr. Jordan. Thank you, mr. Chairman. We recognize i think, advancements that science is making and perhaps this particular facial recognition and advancement such as it is is not ready for primetime. That is what we are trying to ascertain here. It is being used as a separate were. The fbi, doctor goodwin uses this facial recognition system but cannot tell us about the accuracy. In thin the gao has said d. O. J. Officials said there is value in searching all available external data bases regardless of the level of accuracy, that is where my question goes regardless of their level of accuracy. The fbi has said, that ms. Del greco, the facial recognition tool is used for Investigative Leads only. What is the value of searching in accurate databases, i see the downside, the mistaken identity, misidentification, but why is there any value in searching what ever database appears to be the case is available to you based on Investigative Leads only. The fbi uses our trained face examiners to look for candidates that come back on a search for an fbi open investigation and it evaluates all the candidates and provides the search can Investigative Lead lead to conviction . The field office and agent is the one that is primary to the case. They know all the details and we would not be making that decision. It would be up to them to use that tool. It could lead to an a conviction or maybe not . That is correct maam. We could not only lead to conviction and might lead to inaccurate conviction. We hope not. Perhaps they would be inaccurate since we are using the database for investigative purposes alone that as well. Here is what bothers me most. There has been a prominent study done which included an fbi expert and it found that leading facial recognition algorithms like one sold were more inaccurate when used on darker skinned individuals, women and people aged 18 to 30. When compared to white men. We do have some indication when we look at what our population is. Do you agree with the findings of the study . There are demographic effects, this is very timedependent and it depends on the time at which his evaluation was done in the algorithms that were evaluated. They are prepared to release demographic information my concern is, there is excessive, over policing and minority communities, i understand why. But it has resulted in africanamericans being incarcerated at four times the rate of white americans, africanamericans are over represented in mugshots, some facial Recognition Systems scan for potential matches. Do you agree that both the present, overrepresentation of africanamericans in mugshots, photos, the low accuracy rates, that facial Recognition Systems have when assessing darker skinned people . Such as africanamericans. That it is possible that a false conviction could result on the fbi use of these external systems if they are not audited . Her time has expired. You may answer the question. The fbi retains photos in a repository mugshots photos. But they are associated with in a criminal arrest and attend print fingerprint. We do provide we have a robust audit process with the state, federal, local and tribal agencies. We send auditors to those agencies and look at security requirements and we look at the policy, procedures and standards to ensure they require training and follow our process. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I think we all are very much aware of the effects of surveillance on people and their behavior certainly changes, noncriminal speech and noncriminal behavior. It alters the way people behave when their surveillance. There is a pastor for many years, i know the crying eyes of the irs and how that has had a Chilling Effect on speech even when nonprofit organizations and churches. This is an extremely serious thing. When we know the possibility of surveillance is out there. Has the fbi, he mentioned a while ago this facial service unit does that unit or any other unit in the fbi farm for images, photographs, other id type information on american citizens through social media or whatever or other platforms . No we do not stir. Does the fbi, have they ever purchased from a Third Party Contract or wherever else images photographed, id information . No the fbi retains only criminal mugshots photos. Mr. Chairman i would like to ask to be submitted to the record, there is an article by joseph of vice news to monitor social media i also like to submit for the records are archived copy of the spider. Com web domain that states the software is used for ondemand or automated collection of social media user data. Id like that to be submitted. Without objection. I also have and would like to submit the purchase of order logs of the fbi of the Spider Software and Service Agreement of individual license purchased by allied associate. Thank you. There have been software purchased by the fbi and i dont know where youre coming from cannot be aware that. There is a whole other avenue of facial Recognition Technology taking place within the fbi that you know nothing about. Not that i am aware of. Evidently if you dont know anything about this there is. We can look into it. We most certain campaign are you saying to your knowledge, there is no software, although there is, that is being used by the fbi to collect information on u. S. Citizens . I am only aware of the use of our system for criminal justice. And your system would include the systems of the drivers license database . At multiple states . Our system does not retain drivers license photo. But you have access. Your your internal system and then you have the system that you can access. We do not have direct access. A 2016 study on privacy and Technology Found that you do have access to that, a total of 117 million americans which comes to one out of every two adults that you have access to the information. That is incorrect. We disagree with that. The fbi through an active fbi investigation can submit a phot how many do you have access to a strong. They provide a candidate back, we do not have access to the photo. The study disagrees with you. There is a precrime database if you will, i have a little bit of time but i want to yield to the Ranking Member for my time. With the realtime surveillance, has the fbi or any other federal agency to your knowledge ever used realtime surveillance with a continuous look at a group of peoples home location . Not to my knowledge. No other agency has on the, irs or any other agency . I cannot speak on behalf of the other agency. The numbers, doctor goodwin, what number of photos does the fbi have access to and just their database . And just their database, a little over 36 million. In the database, that they can send information to that are screened and used in interface interaction at the state level, what is the total number of photos and all the databases all the repositories about 640 million. 640 million photos . Thats only 330 main people in the country. All this the fbi has access to 600 some million photos and this is the fbi that did not comply with the five things they were supposed to comply with when they set up the system and theyre still not in compliance. If you think about the system, and all the searchable repositories thats over 640 million photos. The fbi only searches for criminals. The looking for criminal photos. Theyre looking for all this to the criminal investigation. But across all the repositories were talking 600 million. We are talking about people who have been arrested right . Arrested, by searching the databases . Yes maam. We would have to do a survey, every 90 days we go out to the agencies to see if theres any input they can provide. We do know theres arrest maids. But its on the identification of the photo. Its a tool to be part of it. If i can add one more thing. Most of those are civil photos those are primarily civil photos when were talking about passports and drivers license. Just regular everyday people . Thank you, mr. Chairman for holding the second hearing of facial recognition. Does the government use this increasing it is important that this technology is not rushed to market and all communities are treated equally and fairly. In your testimony you mentioned the report for publication this fall is on demographic mugshots. Can you talk a little bit about this in your objective . The objective is to ensure complete transparency with regard to the performance of the algorithm that we evaluate. And to see if we can use rigorous analysis to demonstrate the presence or absence of demographic effect. Thats his sister cool analysis has not been completed yet. We have preliminary data that has suggested that demographic effects such as different in age, across ages, different difn sex and can affect or have differences in terms of the algorithms. However, the increased performance across the board for the best performing algorithms we expect diminishing that affect overall. In the fall will have the final report of demographic. When you are doing evaluations for companies are you testing for demographic consistency . We dont test for specific companies on their behalf, we test or evaluate the algorithms that are submitted through the voluntary program. So we dont test specifically for algorithms demographic effect, were talking about across all the algorithms that are submitted. What are you doing to make sure that no categories of people are suffering from low rates of accuracy . The best we can do is to ensure transparency and Public Access to data about the level of demographic effect. We have no Regulatory Authority to do anything about that other than make the Data Available for policymakers to make appropriate decisions. Tsa has partnered on the biometrics for International Travel. How much training they received prior to be getting the Pilot Program at jfk and lax . The training was significant. Multiple days of training and how the system works and how to analyze the results and how effectively is the system . What were the top complaints received during the pilot . From the public . Yeah. I am honestly not aware of any complaints that rose to the surface. In general they seem to enjoy the experience by biometric. Any complaints by employees . I would say employees in general, when you introduce new technology the change can be challenging to use but being in atlanta and talking to the operators as well as the security director, they embrace the technology and find it to be a significant enhancement at the checkpoint. The report and disparity is due to july 2, 2019 are you on schedule for publication and other any previews you can share i dont have any previews available that i can share. The report has been completed and of course section 1919 of the modernization act. It is been compiled and honest way to department of congress. Thank you. Thank you very much. Mr. Meadows. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I am not going to beat up on you but i want to come back and give you two pieces of advice. One, the second advice to give to every witness in the seat next to gao, if theyre not happy im not happy. I would recommend, on the five outstanding things that you work with gao to closes out. The five recommendations that they have are you willing to do that . Absolutely. The fact that you only closed one of them out last week prior to the hearing is what i understand. Is that not accurate . Not that i disagree, we have been completing audits, we completed 14 of the 21 and i think that was enough to satisf if you will report back to the committee, what i would like in the next 60 days is the progress were making and thats as gracious as i can be when it comes to that. We want you to have all the tools to accurately do what you need to do, the second thing i would mention you mentioned about not having any realtime systems. And yet we have testimony just a couple of weeks ago that indicated Chicago Police department, detroit has realtime, they purchased it and taking realtime images, do they ping the fbi to validate what they had picked up in real time with what you have on your database . There are authorized Law Enforcement entities who have access to our system. We train them and expect them to follow. I get that, what im saying were concerned about realtime and you have Police Department in chicago and detroit that are doing realtime surveillance and then getting you type the ticket that. On realtime surveillance . Not to my knowledge. That is opposite of the testimony. Did they purchase a realtime Surveillance Technology with federal funds . Can you do that. Yes, sir. I have been where we looked at cbp and looking at realtime facial recognition when travelers come in and out and i guess you are saying you are not doing that at dallas anymore . Is that correct . You mentioned atlanta and they do it for exam purposes. Tsa is not doing it there. Here is what i would recommend, the priorities the tsa has in the inefficiencies that actually in this committee and other committees have, facial recognition certainly cannot be the top priority in terms of what we are looking at to make sure our traveling public is safer. Reducing that the top priority . Part of the identification travelers thats not the question. Top priority, yes or no. Its one of the more significant. There can only be one top. This is a softball question. I was a property screening at the checkpoint. Ct screenings so you mentioned the fact that you could potentially have taken photos of american citizens dropping off their backs . Is that correct . My questioning earlier you talked about you i have tsa kept the screen process. Only in one location and thats terminal asked in atlanta. You can guarantee, i flown out of concourse f, i have flown out of that on delta. See you can guarantee i was not photographed . Ive never given anybody my permission on International Travel to my knowledge. Can you guarantee i am not picked up in that . Unless your photographed while dropping off the back. That is my question, my question is i gave no one permission to take my picture while im dropping off my bag. Im an american citizen. What legal rights do you have to take the photo. You should not of been photographed. C cannot guarantee i wasnt . So heres what i would recommend, i am all about making sure we have screening and i promise you that ive gone through or screening the most americans this and there inefficiencies have nothing to do with facial recognition. Until you get that right i would suggest you put the Pilot Program on hold. I dont know of any appropriation specifically allows you to have this Pilot Program. Are you aware of any questioning. You keep referring back to 2001 law, i am not aware of any appropriation that a been given you the right to do this Pilot Program. Im not aware of any specific appropriation. I would recommend that you stop until you find out the Statutory Authority. Thank you very much. Before we go to ms. Lawrence, let me follow up on the gentlemans request. One thing that i noticed after being on this committee for 23 years. What happens often is that people say they will get things done and they never get done. So mr. Meadows, in the spirit of efficiency and effectiveness. I think its made every reasonable request that mr. Greco and doctor goodwin get together so we can get some of these items resolved. Im going to call you all back in about two months maybe. I will figure it out. I am worried that this is going to go on and on and in the meantime im sure will be able to come up with Bipartisan Solutions but, the american systems are hyping and being placed in jeopardy as a result of a system that is not ready for primetime. So we will call you all back. I hope we get together as soon as possible. I say this because i have seen over and over again and will be in the same position or worse in three years, five years, ten years. By that time, so many citizens may have been subjective to something they should have not. With that i appreciate your leadership on that and your followup. I now called distinguished lady from michigan. Ms. Lawrence. Thank you, mr. Chair. Depict the thirdparty testing is important for the deployment of facial Recognition Technology . And i want you to know that i said on the criminal justice Appropriation Committee and funding for nist is something that i have a responsibility for. I would really like to respond to these questions. I think independent assessment of new technologies particularly if youre going to be used in certain ways in one e things we are privileged to do. How dependent are Government Agencies on nist finding . How dependent . It is hard for me too assess that. I think we certainly have collaborative relationships with dhs, fbi and other federal agencies part of the statutory requirement is working with other agencies on advancement of technologies and evaluation of technology. Is there a way we can move forward that you can do an assessment so we would know when were talking about the findings which is a critical factor . Is there a way we can move forward so we can assess what is the role that you play . With respect to facial recognition we have ongoing evaluations on a rolling basis. So participants can submit algorithms at any time and we continue to provide open public transparent evaluation methodology so everyone, federal agencies and the public, private sector can see the results of our testing and make determinations on effectiveness of algorithms. Through the chair i would like to see and review the. Which organizations are currently equipped to accurately test new facial recognition technologies. We are certainly equipped to do that, at most, i dont have any information about other entities that might also be equipped to do that. Do you believe in ifc has significant funding and resources to carry out the work as a standard barrier of the facial recognition industry . Yes we have sufficient resources to execute the program and biometrics. Secure this is evolving and were looking at the challenges, do you have enough funding for the r d and for the checks and balances for you to be the standard barrier of the facial recognition industry . Nothing frustrates me more for you to come before congress and say i have everything i need and when you didnt do the job to say you did not have the funding. Im asking this question and i need you to be honest. One is we have a long track record of delivering highquality evaluations and biometrics for 60 years. The second part, it is a bit awkward for me in front of congress or any federal official to speak about funding levels, i will make the, that any Resource Organization can do more with more. I will leave it at that. For me too do my job i have to get past accurate and you have to have a plan directed in a want to ask if anyone on the panel wanted to comment on the organization to test new facial Recognition Technology. Are there any comments . Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, chairman comment and Ranking Member jordan. And thank you all for being here today. America has been a leader and innovator in the technology sector, American Companies that pioneered many of the technologies deployed around the world, however, as the sector continues to grow we need to ensure our Government Agencies are accurately deploying this technology within the bounds of law. This past week, i was in china and i saw facial Recognition Technology deployed on a massive scale. From the moment i was getting ready to get on the airplane. There were cameras everywhere. Ali baba recently instituted a program where customers can smile to pay using facial Recognition Technology i also saw cameras at street crossings that can pinpoint individuals who are breaking traffic laws. It was daunting to see the government shaming individuals so publicly which is a stark contrast to what her privacy and liberty is in america. They would flash your face right there. Seeing this use of facial Recognition Technology in china poses many questions to the United States about the appropriate use of this technology. Ms. Goodwin, what steps can government take to ensure facial Recognition Technology is being deployed in a way that is accurate. Thank you for the question. I will always go back to the recommendations that we made when we did this work a few years ago that the d. O. J. Is still working through so accuracy, transparency are key when we are talking about this technology as well as making certain we are protecting privacy rights, and to go back to the recommendations, we want d. O. J. To pay more attention to what their testing and we want them to assess whether the ips or whether the information is accurate and we wanted to assess and have an understanding of whether the information theyre getting from the external partners are also accurate. Thank you. To your knowledge, has the fbi had any identification of individuals when utilizing facial Recognition Technology. We tested all of the list sizes. We conducted the vendor testing and are implementing a new algorithm and we work continuously with our state and federal and local partners on the use of our system and we also commission to do a 2019 and onward which is called an ongoing facial recognition test where we can test the accuracy of the system yearly. With regard to misidentification im not aware. Basically my next question falls right in line, does the fbi have any plans to assess the rate of missed identifications generated by the next generation identification interstate photosystem . This was designed to return to her more candidates. We provide an Investigative Lead for active in Law Enforcement in the Law Enforcement entity. We require training for Law Enforcement to follow the mgi interstate policy implementation guide in the facial identification scientific standards. Anyone running a search for the mgi interstate photosystem must comply with the policies and standards and audited by the fda annually. Can you discuss the regulations in place that allow for an agency to utilize facial Recognition Technology and how strictly these regulations are enforced . I know for the f di field office must have an open assessment or an active investigation and they must follow the attorney general guidelines associated with that for us to be able to receive a photo from them and then submit the photo for search. Doctor goodwin. To your knowledge has the fbi been adhering to these relations . We are working very closely with the fbi and if i can go back to something she said earlier. The testing that they are currently doing, the new information theyre providing, until we see that we will not close our recommendations. We need to make certain they are making recommendations as we put forward. Thank you. Are you back my time. Mr. Gomez. Thank you, mr. Chairman. In the history of this country weve had a debate and goal of Marlena Alvirez balance security with a buddy. But in the era of facial recognition we are stumbling into the future without understanding how much liberty we are giving up for how much security. And really without understanding we have to set up guidelines that really dictate the use of this technology. So that is where my approach comes from. I have a lot of concerns regarding the false positive rates of the technology, racial bias in the technology, gender bias and even during, this is pride month and i think about the trans gender and nonbinary communities. We have seen reports that show that black women are more likely to be misidentified than any other group. So when you layer on top of that the transgender or nonbinary black individual, what happens to those results . Have you seen any data when it comes to the Lgbtq Community specifically the Transgender Community . We have not done an analysis for the Transgender Community. I am not sure we would obtain the relevant data that we could used to do that. I am aware of concerns in the Transgender Community about the potential for problematic. I appreciate that. A lot of this is revolved around training. I know nist has pointed out and indicated that people are likely to be believed computergenerated results. And those who are not specially trained and face recognition have problems identifying people they do not know even if they perform based identifications as part of their work. Im keeping on mind when my question im about to answer. First, what is the interval level that the fbi uses when it comes to running the program for the matches. If the 80 , 85 , 95 , 99 . Are quoted accuracy rate, and we do not have matches, its an Investigative Lead, two or more candidates the system is not built to respond to one, currently we have 85 accuracy rate although since the last hearing . When you run the program is it set to a high level that needs to be accurate to 95 confidence level that the computer recognizes that this individual is 95 likely to be this person or is 80 . I was on Cells Program at 80 default . What do you run your program . We dont conduct an identification match we dont look at that. We have an accuracy rate that we rely on and we are currently implementing the vendor recognition test results at 99. 12 at a rank one and 99. 72 at a rank 50. That is a new algorithm but because it is not a true identification we dont report that. How does the fbi trust computergenerated results . Through the testing with nist for sure. We as other agencies and entities to provide testing results to us. You train the personal to perform facial comparisons of persons that are unknown to them . We receive photos from an active investigation from the Fbi Field Office, fbi agent and they process that photo against our mug shot report repository and receive a candidate back and are trained to evaluate. Is fbi Trained Personnel in the potential accuracy of facial recognition algorithm . Bias . Yes. No, sir. The fbi does publish winds at . I think the employees, our system does not look at skin tone and features, and some mathematical computation the comes back. I understand that youre basically describing facial Recognition Technology. The outsides studies have shown theres a bias when it comes to certain populations in the error rate is a lot higher. Were you aware that the aclu conducted a match of different members of congress of 80 interval levels and including myself were mismatched positively with a mug shot photos . The technology urethr refereo his identification we dont do that. We do to 50 candidates and they look at two candidates or more we dont look at onetoone match. The fbi in a transfer party or manner consistent with the guideline and recommendation outlined by the facial Identification Working Group. It does not endorse a comparison to compare the certification certification finger print print they require hours of training before person can be certified. Since there is no formal process, what standard does fbi require personnel to connect facial analysis questioning. They have to comply. We require all Law Enforcement entities that have access to the interstate photosystem to follow the implementation guide and standard. They have to follow those. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Presley. Its been clear that the technology has been flawed unlawfully producing false matches due to algorithmic bias. Including to Everyday Americans in effect Even Congress which represented gomez was one of those and speaking to that. There is growing incredible concern over the un authorized use of the technology in public spaces such as airport schools and courthouses. These systems could be subject to misuse and abuse by Law Enforcement. We know that this technology is often used without consent. There is no real safeguards, no guard rails, this is not fully developed and i went to take a moment to say that i appreciate the leadership of the city of somerville who have passed the moratorium on the surveillance and software. Because of the fact that it is not developed and the safeguard an ogre wheels. Much of my line of questioning has been asked but i want to pick up on a couple of things in the space of contents because i wanted to get some accuracy questions and better understand for the purposes of the record here, do you keep data on how many people opt out for the facial Recognition Technology . I am not aware that we are collecting data on people who choose not to participate. But i dont think were collecting. You have no idea how many people have opted out of previous tsa facial recognition Pilot Programs . No maam. Do know how many passengers were notified of tsa use of facial Recognition Technology questioning. A notification at the airport consist of signage and verbal instruction from the officers so if they are in the lane where facial technology is being piloted that 100 of the people being aware that it is being used. They have to assume a suitable post to actually have the camera capture their image. If this is based on signage which in many ways can be arbitrary how are folks even aware of the option to opt out other than signage . And how do they opt out . It is announced, if youd like to have your picture taken for your identification please standard here otherwise can you please see your credentials your hand carried a dedication. Is communicated in multiple linkages . For the purpose of the pilot has not been communicated in multiple languages. Just for the purpose of the record i guess i over spoke based on my own desires that the minutes of polity in massachusetts seven an ordinance to ban but is not past the moratoriums. I wanted to correct that. Let me for a moment just get back into some questions regarding government benchmarking for facial recognition. Are you aware of how many Government Agencies used are produced facial Recognition Technology . Anyone . I dont know the answer. Nor do i. I want to put in front of everyone. The jail does have ongoing work looking at the use of frt at cbp and tsa. So we will be following up on the information here. So is there a stabilizing like a comparative benchmark as to the accuracy of these programs and how they compare with other programs . We are not aware of that as of yet. Did they present any red flags agencies about inaccuracies in any particular system used by Government Agency that you are aware of . This does not interpret the Scientific Data in terms of red flags. Instead we ensure that everyone who is using facial Recognition Technology has access to the Scientific Data that we publish about the performance of algorithms that have been voluntarily submitted. I think that is it for now. I yield. There is ongoing work, what is happening there . We have ongoing work as a request of the senate and House Homeland Committee to look at the use of facial Recognition Technology at dhs in a particular tsa and cbp. We also have ongoing work looking at the commercial uses and if i could circle back to congresswoman presleys comment about consent, there is the senate bill that will look at consent but it only looks at consent from the standpoint of commercial usage not federal usage. So we have those ongoing jobs and then j80 does have a requested to look at face Recognition Technology across the rest of Law Enforcement. Were going back to questions of the whole idea of language, do you feel comfortable im assuming you looked at tsa already right . We are starting that engagement you have not looked at the Pilot Program . Not as of yet but i imagine that will be part of what we examine. That just started at geo. One thing im hoping you look at is the question, people are trying to get to where the gotta go. A lot of them dont know what facial recognition is. They dont have a clue. But a lot of times. And then it becomes a language problem. That is even more something to consider. Have you thought about that . Yes, one of the reasons were doing these pilots is to assess the efficiency of how we communicate with passengers. Can we do it better, can a science be better . Multiple language in certain areas, is that something we should look at. All of that will be assessed with respect to the pilots. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I have to tell you. I hope this is okay, this stuff freaks me out. Im a little freaked out by facial recognition. I hope thats okay. That is okay. My residence in michigan have been subjected to increase surveillance and over policing for decades pray currently the city of detroit rolled out realtime Video Surveillance programs all project greenlight in a 2016 to monitor crime at latenight businesses like gas stations and liquor stores. But now the system has expanded to over 500 locations including parks, schools, womens clinics, Addiction Treatment centers, and now Public Housing building. Without notice or Public Comments from residents the detroit Police Department added facial Recognition Technology to the project greenlight which means detroit Police Department has the ability to locate anyone who is a michigan drivers license or an arrest record in realtime feedin using video cas across the city in a database of 50 million photos. In january 2019, reports emerge that fdi have begun the use of amazon recognition, amazon controversial software that can match bases in realtime video. Similar to project greenlight. Recognition like realtime facial surveillance programs has dangerous high error rate for women of color as compared to white males. In the 13 congressional district, residents will be dissed personally bear the arms of face recognition identification. So what policies does fdi have in place regarding the use of facial Recognition Technology. I her claims that you are not using it but there is a Pilot Program correct . There is not. For the amazon Recognition Software to the best of my knowledge, im verified before came today. The fbi does not have a contract with amazon for the Recognition Software. We do not perform realtime surveillance. Through the chair, if you can produce the documentation in the information to our committee i would greatly appreciate that. Can you explain how the fbi is not currently using amazon recognition at all . In march 2017 the report of facial Recognition Systems would apply to individuals captured in realtime video footage. A report found significant higher error rates for user recognition and as low as 60 . Do you think that the use of realtime facial Recognition Technology is ready for Law Enforcement usage . That is adjustment that we are not prepared to make. That the policy judgment that should be on the best available Scientific Data which is our position. What is your Scientific Data say . It verifies them facial recognition accuracy is highly dependent on image quality and on the presence of injuries, both of those things can affect the ability is any valuable solution to improve the realtime capabilities . I cannot predict how accurate the systems will be in the future as they continue to develop. Currently systems that use facial images that are not in profile or not straight on like mug shot images or facial images that are indistinct or blurred have a much lower ability. Do you have any information about the inaccuracies, i know you all have several recommendations. Can you talk more in the question in regards, is this fixable . In regards to your question about the amazon Recognition Technology, that is not something that we looked at for the purpose of our report. I will not be able to speak to that. In regards to right now the usage of facial recognition accuracy. You had like six recommendations of transparency and support. I was talking to my colleagues, how do you fix Something Like this where you dont film innocent people into a database. And i heard 411 million and i heard from you 600 Million People are now in this database that is being used for criminal Justice Purposes which im not sure what the definition is of that. Will start a little bit at the beginning. For the in g. I. Ips there are 36 million photos in the criminal part of that. There are 21 million photos for the civil part of that. As you look across all of the searchable databases and repositories that they have access to, thats over 600 million. Thats what i was talking about earlier. The recommendations that we made related to accuracy, we feel like this will go a long way in helping d. O. J. And better ensure that the data they are collecting in the way they use information that that is accurate. As of yet, d. O. J. Has yet to close those recommendations and we will loo work closely to get those close because the issues around privacy and accuracy are important and vitally important when talking about using this technology. If it is possible, and this is important to my district. If we can get followup in confirmation that the Current Administration does not have any Pilot Program going on. Thank you very much. I dont know if you heard me earlier. We are going to bring folks back from six weeks to two months, and im hoping before then they will have those questions resolve. Definitely we will check back then. Missile because you cortes. Thank you, mr. Chair. In the for the moment, our Founding Fathers had the right of people to be secure in their persons, houses and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. The Fourth Amendment guarantees that these areas shall not be unreasonably intruded upon with most searches founded upon a warrant. Over the last few weeks we have been hearing from the private sector or the public that we heard about facial Recognition Technology being used in airports and social media et cetera. You are with the fbi, does they ever obtain warrants before the facial Recognition Technology . The criminal mug shot are searched by the Law Enforcement partners and all photos are collected pursuant to an arrest with a fingerprint. In use of facial recognition, it is beyond the search of the criminal database but scanning a persons face and searching their face in order to match the database, does fdi attain a warrant to search someones face using that . We do not do realtime searching. You require external partners to obtain a war . They must do so with the criminal Law Enforcement interest. Does the fbi use any information from any other agency . We share our record with other federal agencies with regard to Law Enforcement purposes. Chairman cummings stated that he was present at the 2015 baltimore protest following the death of freddie gray. At those protest the Baltimore County Police Department allegedly used facial Recognition Technology to identify and arrest certain citizens present at the protest and exercising the First Amendment rights. Has the fdi ever use the facial recognition deployed near a protest clinical rally or any other sensitive location . Thank you, you are with the tsa. To collaborate with private Companies Including delta and jetblue. To develop and implement their facial recognition search systems. Is this correct . Maam weve issued a Security Program amendment to use biometric identification at the rate drop. Internment partnering with them to develop the backend matching system, that is something we are so engaged with the cdp. The backdrop that is where they get the boarding pass from . I would use the term key offer that. There is no equity there, that is to verify that that passenger is with delta. At our checkpoint and also the backdrop where we are required to ensure that the passenger matches the bag. To the individuals know that that is happening and do they provide explicit consent. Is it often . Passengers have the upper unity to opt out. So its possible that jetblue and delta are working with the tsa to capture photos of passengers faces without their explicit option concern. I was in atlanta last week and watch the delta process and it was very clear while i was down there the passengers were afforded the opportunity to use facial capture for identification and to stand in front of the camera to do so. This capture is not saved in any way but is that correct . The camera captures the image and the images scripted and it is sent to the matching system which is what cdp uses solely for the purpose of match. In that match result is sent back to the operator. Is that captured and destroyed. It is not retained at all. It is simply not retained. No maam. These companies and potentially be using any part of this process to either capture the algorithm or data to mark. No mama dont see that happening currently with the process we are doing now. Thank you very much. Thank you very much mr. Chairman. When we had our hearing on may 22nd in this committee, there was an mit researcher. He was testifying about data sense that misuses and that they may not adequately test for the full range of diversity which is present in the us population. She said quote and evaluating benchmark datasets from our organizations like mist, i found some surprising imbalances. One prominent mist data was 75 percent male and some were lighter skinned what id like to call pale male. Can you discuss how representative when it comes to race gender and age . Sure the data we obtain, is from multiple sources, the largest amount of data that we get the first time they need to make a distinction between data that we are releasing as part of the ability for vendors to determine whether they are able to submit their algorithms to our system to our evaluation process. We provide them with data for that. The rest of our data and the best marked majority of it is sequestered, it is not made public, it is solely for the purposes of the evaluation. Most of the data is fbi image data that we sequester and protect from release. There are some other image data related to Creative Commons to images that we have received with full institutional review. That involves permissions and also deceased data sets. In all cases, if you look at the full suite of data, it is true that it is not representative of the population as a whole. However, we have a large enough data set that are evaluation capabilities can be statistically analyzed to determine demographic effects of race, age, or. We are in the process now and will release the report in the fall. I get this is the last hearing youve been testing for differential rates, on the facial Recognition Systems between races and genders. Can you talk a little bit more about the error rates of the algorithms that you tested between different races and genders . Sure, i can say a little bit of preliminary information but i want to stress that the full statistical analysis, the rigorous analysis is not completed yet. The report will be released in the fall that outlines the full conclusions that we have. With regard to effects demographic effects broadly speaking. We cant say, that there are still remaining differences even with the extraordinary advances in the algorithms over the last five years, there are still differences remaining that we can detect. We dont yet know whether those differences regarding to race or age, are significant and we dont know yet until we have completed that analysis. You understand the concern, at least two levels of analysis that we have enlistment schematic today one is a threshold question whether we like or dont like this Technology Even the general threat that it can pose to several liberties. The second being is whether recognizing that the technology is barreling ahead anyhow, and is being adopted and implied increasingly. Across many different platforms and uses whether its being developed in a way that ensures that when its used, its not being used in a discriminatory fashion, is not being applied unfairly, et cetera. That depends on the algorithms being developed in a way that is respectful of accurate data and we are not there yet. As i understand it so it just increases the anxiety levels. We are going to be paying a lot of attention and i am glad they are chairmans are having you all back. This is sort of a moving target here. We are going to be paying a lot of attention to how the data gets digested and how the algorithms flow from that data are being applied, whether they are accurate and so forth. We appreciate your testimony but obviously this is not the end of the inquiry. Without a doubt. A while ago, we were told that the basis for a lot of these agreements between the fai and the states the authorization was actually in regulations whatever, were put together before facial technology came about. You talk about the moving target. It wasnt even anticipating this. Thats a part of the problem. Thank you very much. Thank you mr. Chairman, i want to thank our witnesses for being here today. I appreciate your time and the expertise that you bring to this important hearing. I think you understand that from both of the sites there is a real concern and to answer a lot of questions. I hope you understand how curious everyone is on this committee with this issue. I think you need to understand the framework, you talk about strict standards in price. There were strict standards in place on how we use on on how people go by the court get information and put information in front of the court. The attorney general of the United States, as fast to look at the potential spying of a campaign. This is the context and framework of many honors i see this happening and its happening when gal and not jim jordan and not republicans, doctor goodman said when you started this, you didnt follow the ecommerce law and you didnt do privacy assessment like you are supposed to and you did not provide timely notice and you did not check with the bases that you are supposed to interact with. Thats the framework so when republicans talk about we are concerned and working with democrats and i really do appreciate the chairmans focus on two hearings in our third hearing, and the key legislation that we made and we may attempt the path here, this is the framework. I hope youll tell the folks back at the fbi that we appreciate the great work the fbi agents do every day protecting our country and stopping bad things from happening and fighting bad people who do bad things. But the frame work in the context is very serious and thats why we are coming at this with the intense activity that we have. So again, mr. Chairman thank you for your leadership on this and i would think our witnesses again for being here. I too want to thank the witnesses were being here for almost three hours. We really do appreciate your testimonies. Of all of the issues that weve been dealing with this probably will receive the most intense scrutiny of them all. The Ranking Member referred to bring it all back. We also have two subcommittees that also are looking into this. We want to get it right is just that important. I think you. Without objection, the following should be a part of the hearing records. Face recognition performance relevant formation, scientific study, dated december 6, 2012, faceoff, Law Enforcement use of things Recognition Technology white paper, by the Electronic Frontier foundation, jail party open recommendations, department of justice is barred jail, opening ongoing face recognition vendor tests, verification, ongoing face recognition vendor test, part two in this report, face and video evaluation face recognition of Non Cooperative subjects, in this report, letter calling for federal monitory them on face recognition correlation letter and the correlation of privacy Civil Liberties to rights and in al cu. Georgetown law, lg Pp Technology partnership, and the and in the cp. I want to thank again our witnesses for being here today. Without objection all members will have five legislative days within which to submit additional written questions for the witnesses to the chair. They will be forwarded to the witnesses for the response i would ask. Please respond as promptly as possible. With that, this hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversation] saturday on book tv at 10 00 a. M. Eastern. Life coverage from the mississippi book festival. Featuring author on American History with author eric judy dolan. The civil war, and south. With historian jack. Race and civil rights with professor dave towle. True crime with author casey self. World war ii with historian alex kristoff. Then sunday, 9 00 p. M. Eastern, afterwards with journalist natalie author of the knowledge gap. Some of the kids dont have the background knowledge to understand the reading test in the first place. Some toddlers can not make a reference, thats not the problem is so much as the lack of the vocabulary to understand the passage. That has been a big problem that and overlooked. Watch more tv every weekend on cspan two. The cspan city tour is on the road exploring the american story. In many ways montana is changing and is one of the fastest if not the fastest micro bulletin areas in term of growth in the country. With help from our spectrum people partners we take you to bozeman montana. The most famous porn agent for dinosaurs we find t rexs in two of the most iconic dinosaurs and we have that here in montana. Ive enjoyed the incredibly beloved author in montana and really gives voice to the working people in montana. Watched bozeman montana this saturday 6 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan two book tv. Sunday at 2 00 p. M. On American History tv on cspan three. Working with our cable affiliates, as we explore the american story. For 40 years cspan has been providing unfiltered coverage. The white house, the Supreme Court, and Public Policy events from washington dc and around the country. You can make up your own mind. Created by cable in 1979, cspan has brought to you by your local cable or satellite provider. Cspan your unfiltered view of government. Every year cspan awards fellowships to several middle school and High School Teachers who have demonstrated innovative methods of incorporating cspan programs in their teaching. They joined the Relations Team in washington dc, for four weeks in july, to develop new teaching materials
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.