Do You Feel Safer Knowing the FBI Has Access To 640 Million (!) Headshots?
Don't worry, a spokesman tells Congress, the agency has "strict policies" for using facial recognition technology.

The FBI cops to the fact that its database of mugshots, called the Interstate Photo System, has about 36 million entries. The feds use facial recognition technology, among other techniques, to sift through photos during its investigations.
But that's the tip of the iceberg. Gretta Goodwin, a director at the Government Accountability Office (GAO), told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee today that the FBI can scan about 640 million pictures, including not just mugshots but driver's licenses and passport photos. From the AP's account:
Taking into account the bureau contracts providing access to driver's licenses in 21 states, and its use of photos and other databases, the FBI has access to about 640 million photographs, Goodwin told lawmakers at the House oversight committee hearing.
But don't worry, because the FBI has "strict policies" governing the use of such technology, said a spokesman for an agency that is exceedingly well-known for what the American Civil Liberties Union calls an "unchecked abuse of authority" that is exceptionally well-documented in Tim Weiner's 2012 book Enemies: A History of the FBI. While J. Edgar Hoover's legendary contempt for the rule of law and darkly comic episodes such as a failed attempt to discern the lyrics of the 1963 pop song "Louie, Louie" are widely known, the FBI continues to be a dumpster fire when it comes to accountability. A 2018 Time cover story, for instance, was titled "The FBI Is in Crisis. It's Worse Than You Think," and wrote about internal investigations that, among other things,
showed that the ousted deputy director of the FBI, Andrew McCabe, had lied to the bureau's internal investigations branch to cover up a leak he orchestrated about Clinton's family foundation less than two weeks before the election. … Another IG report in March found that FBI retaliation against internal whistle-blowers was continuing despite years of bureau pledges to fix the problem. Last fall, [Justice Department Inspector General Michael] Horowitz found that the FBI wasn't adequately investigating "high-risk" employees who failed polygraph tests.
Back to today's congressional testimony about the FBI's access to photos and its rules about using facial recognition technology:
Kimberly Del Greco, a deputy assistant director at the FBI, said the bureau has strict policies for using facial recognition. She said it is used only when there is an active FBI investigation or an assessment, which can precede a formal investigation. When using the state databases, the FBI submits a so-called "probe photo" and then states conduct a search to yield a list of potential candidates to be reviewed by trained federal agents.
"Facial recognition is a tool that, if used properly, can greatly enhance law enforcement capabilities and protect public safety," she said.
In May, Reason's Ronald Bailey hailed a decision by San Francisco's board of supervisors to ban law enforcement use of facial recognition technology. Here's part of his reasoning:
We know that government agencies have and still do rifle largely unhindered through private communications databases at will. Perhaps federal espionage and law enforcement agencies will be more punctilious about observing our constitutional right to privacy with respect to this emerging surveillance technology, but I wouldn't count on it.
A bipartisan group of congressional representatives have apparently just agreed to draft legislation—possibly including a moratorium—to regulate law enforcement use of facial recognition. Given Congress's ongoing refusal to rein in domestic spying programs, legislative action on this issue deserves close monitoring.
It doesn't seem too panicky to observe the principles of federalism such that states and localities can explore ways to prevent law enforcement abuse of this emerging surveillance technology.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Simple solution apply the NAP to the government, prohibit it from initiating force. That will solve all the other problems too.
A similar thought occurred to me. Disarm the police and FBI. They get to keep their immunity, but only private citizens get to carry firearms as is implied by the 2A. They would have to hire contractors if they want to initiate force to make an arrest.
The persons initiating force would be held to a reasonable behavior standard and liable for false arrest and excessive force. The police would actually have to do their job and act like decent human beings. They would have to make requests of citizens and compliance with their unconstitutional 'lawful orders' would not be compulsory.
Did you hear about the police officer in Florida being charged with a criminal offense for allegedly refusing to risk his life to save school children from a gunman? It's going to be a joy watching the black robed fucks square that one with their precedent for excusing everything under the sun.
Normally the cops don't have a duty to protect anyone but they are trying to label him a caretaker which comes with responsibility.
He's a shitbird cop but he is also the fall guy to take heat off the Sheriff and that department.
“Do You Feel Safer Knowing the FBI Has Access To 640 Million (!) Headshots?”
Yes, because up until a few moments ago, I only wondered if they had access to 640 million headshots.
[…] Source […]
That's a day's worth of Millennial selfies. Am I right, people?
Good for the FBI.
Now, what about facebook, Verizon, Google, AT&T, et al?
At least the mugshots and driver's license photos were taken openly with a pretext of consent.
Taking your picture isn't an act of aggression. Searching a video database to see who was at a location where some crime occurred isn't an act of aggression either. I don't see the problem.
The FBI has been corrupt since day one. Headquarters is named after the infamous J Edgar. The civil liberties violations and criminal conduct would, and do, fill volumes. Why has this organization not been disbanded?
Because of the files - because of the files
Am I the only one that thinks of the movie Kingpin when you read punctilious?
darkly comic episodes such as a failed attempt to discern the lyrics of the 1963 pop song "Louie, Louie"
He should have tried listening to the Toots and the Maytal’s version.
"The FBI Is in Crisis. It's Worse Than You Think”
I thought it was going to be about that one time recently when they found out that of 28 examiners with the FBI Laboratory’s microscopic hair comparison unit, 26 overstated forensic matches in ways that favored prosecutors in more than 95 percent of the 268 trials reviewed going back years. The cases included those of 32 defendants sentenced to death. Of those, 14 had been executed or died in prison.
Yup. Hair, fiber, bullet ballistic comparisons and polygraphs have been bad science since day 1.
The DOJ and FBI knew that juries eat up "science". Just get a bureaucrat on the stand to act like they are experienced and skilled scientists and you will get your conviction.
Not to mention false faith in this junk science DNA stuff that can no longer even tell a man from a woman.
From Cointelpro to Randy Weaver to the present mess, it has become hard not to see the FBI as functioning as this country's secret political police. A person whose name I have forgotten said that the bureau is corrupt beyond any hope of reform and should be shut down with its legitimate duties transferred to the US marshals. That won't happen, but one can see how someone might be disgusted enough to wish for it. There is little reason for a citizen to trust the bureau at present, and good reason to be wary of it.
[…] Read More […]
[…] to a Reason report, the FBI admits that it has a database of 36 million entries of mugshots. This database, the […]
[…] family and embroil you in a decade-long court battle which will utterly bankrupt you because some computer decided you look like somebody who supposedly broke some law, don’t say I didn’t warn […]
[…] of known faces. At a recent congressional hearing, the FBI acknowledged it has access to more than 640 million headshots. Courts have ruled that people in public can be photographed without their permission because they […]
[…] of known faces. At a recent congressional hearing, the FBI acknowledged it has access to more than 640 million headshots. Courts have ruled that people in public can be photographed without their permission because they […]
[…] of known faces. At a recent congressional hearing, the FBI acknowledged it has access to more than 640 million headshots. Courts have ruled that people in public can be photographed without their permission because they […]
[…] to a Reason report, the FBI admits that it has a database of 36 million entries of mugshots. This database, the […]