![Federal Trade Commission building in Washington, D.C. Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALM](http://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/392/2022/05/US-Federal-Trade-Commission-Building-2022-012-767x633.jpg)
Senators Seek FTC Probe of ID.me Selfie Technology
In a letter to the Federal Trade Commission requesting an investigation, four Democratic senators asked the regulator to examine whether identity verification company ID.me's statements pointed to its use of illegal "deceptive and unfair business practices."
May 18, 2022 at 12:41 PM
5 minute read
A group of Democratic senators has asked the Federal Trade Commission to investigate whether identity verification company ID.me illegally misled consumers and government agencies over its use of controversial facial recognition software.
ID.me, which uses a mixture of selfies, document scans, and other methods to verify people's identities online, has grown rapidly during the coronavirus pandemic, largely as a result of contracts with state unemployment departments and federal agencies, including the Internal Revenue Service.
The company, which says it has more than 80 million users, has also faced growing questions about that role as well as whether a private contractor should be allowed to act as a de facto gatekeeper to government services. It is already the subject of an investigation by the House Oversight and Reform Committee.
Key to the concerns have been questions about ID.me's use of facial recognition technology. After long claiming that it only used "one-to-one" technology that compared selfies taken by users to scans of a driver's license or other government-issued ID the company earlier this year said it actually maintained a database of facial scans and used more controversial "one-to-many" technology.
In a letter sent to FTC chairman Lina Khan requesting an investigation, Sens. Ron Wyden, Cory Booker, Ed Markey and Alex Padilla on Wednesday asked the regulator to examine whether the company's statements pointed to its use of illegal "deceptive and unfair business practices."
ID.me's initial statements about its facial recognition software appeared to have been employed to mislead both consumers and government officials, the senators wrote in the letter.
"Americans have particular reason to be concerned about the difference between these two types of facial recognition," the senators said. "While one-to-one recognition involves a one-time comparison of two images in order to confirm an applicant's identity, the use of one-to-many recognition means that millions of innocent people will have their photographs endlessly queried as part of a digital "line up."
The use of one-to-many technology also raised concerns about false matches that led to applicants being denied benefits or having to wait months to receive them, the senators said. The risk was "especially acute" for people of color, with tests showing many facial recognition algorithms have higher rates of false matches for Black and Asian users.
Questions over ID.me's use of facial recognition software surfaced in January after the publication of a Bloomberg Businessweek article on the company. That coincided with growing concerns over an $86 million contract with the IRS that would have required American taxpayers to enroll in ID.me in order to use online services. The IRS has since announced that it is looking at alternatives to ID.me.
In interviews with Bloomberg Businessweek as well as in a January blog post by Bake Hall, its chief executive officer, ID.me had defended the fairness of its facial recognition systems partly by saying the company merely used a one-to-one matching system that compares a selfie taken by the user with their photo ID. "Our 1:1 face match is comparable to taking a selfie to unlock a smartphone. ID.me does not use 1:many facial recognition, which is more complex and problematic," Hall wrote in the post.
A week later, Hall corrected the record in a post on LinkedIn, saying the company did use a one-to-many facial recognition system, in which an image is compared against often-massive databases of photos.
Hall, in that post, said the company's use of a one-to-many algorithm was limited to checks for government programs it says are targeted by organized crime and does not involve any external or government database.
"This step is not tied to identity verification," Hall wrote. "It does not block legitimate users from verifying their identity, nor is it used for any other purpose other than to prevent identity theft. Data shows that removing this control would immediately lead to significant identity theft and organized crime."
While researchers and activists have raised concerns about privacy, accuracy and bias issues in both systems, multiple studies show the one-to-many systems perform poorly on photos of people with darker skin, especially women. Companies such as Amazon.com Inc. and Microsoft Corp. have as a result paused selling those types of software to police departments and have asked for government regulation in the field.
According to internal Slack messages obtained by CyberScoop, ID.me's software, demonstrated to the IRS, made use of Amazon's Rekognition product, the very same one that Amazon has stopped selling to law enforcement.
The company had not disclosed its use of Rekognition in a white paper on its technology issued earlier that month.
Privacy and artificial intelligence safety advocates have also complained that ID.me has not opened up its facial recognition systems to outside audit.
Shawn Donnan and Dina Bass report for Bloomberg News.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All![LSU General Counsel Quits Amid Fracas Over First Amendment Rights of Law Professor LSU General Counsel Quits Amid Fracas Over First Amendment Rights of Law Professor](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/e4/89/7a15bb6249e9a2634f483890c5dd/winston-decuir-767x633-1.jpg)
LSU General Counsel Quits Amid Fracas Over First Amendment Rights of Law Professor
7 minute read![Holland & Knight Debuts Defense Industry Group Amid High Demand Holland & Knight Debuts Defense Industry Group Amid High Demand](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/e1/3b/7e759d9e4d05944c021840010922/us-army-767x633.jpg)
![Lawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business? Lawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business?](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/c6/09/887e18ff42bda2b42ebaaf3e0681/immigration-ice-detention-3-767x633.jpg)
Lawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business?
6 minute read![5th Circuit Considers Challenge to Louisiana's Ten Commandments Law 5th Circuit Considers Challenge to Louisiana's Ten Commandments Law](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/398/2024/10/IMG_2111-767x633-2.jpg)
Trending Stories
- 1On the Move and After Hours: Einhorn Barbarito; Gibbons; Greenbaum Rowe; Pro Bono Partnership
- 2On The Move: Squire Patton Boggs, Akerman Among Four Firms Adding Atlanta Partners
- 3Is the Collateral Order Doctrine About to Have a 'Brat Summer'?
- 4Trump Administration Faces Lawsuit Over USAID Stop-Work Orders
- 5Legaltech Rundown: Davis Wright Tremaine Announces CodeX Partnership, AAA Brings on Maya Markovich as VP, and More
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250