A privacy threat model for identity verification based on facial recognition

Beyond surveillance: privacy, ethics, and regulations in face recognition technology

“…The current scholarly debate underscores the inadequacy of implied consent in public spaces, advocating instead for explicit, informed consent that recognizes the sensitivity of facial data (Zennayi et al, 2023 ). The ethical conundrum emerges from the lack of viable alternatives for individuals unwilling to surrender their biometric data, often necessitating withdrawal from public or societal utilities—a form of coercive consent that contravenes ethical norms (Beltrán and Calvo, 2023 ).…”

“…The technology's operation—analyzing, quantifying, and cataloging human faces—arguably reduces individuals to mere data points within vast informational networks. This commodification of personal identity underscores concerns about dehumanization and potential abuses of power (Beltrán and Calvo, 2023 ). The efficiency benefits touted by FRT proponents must be weighed against these profound ethical compromises.…”

“…According to BIPA, private entities are required to furnish prior notice and obtain explicit consent from individuals before collecting their biometric information. Both the notice and consent must be provided in writing, with the consent being “informed written consent.” Furthermore, BIPA prohibits any private entity in possession of biometric identifiers or biometric information from engaging in activities such as selling, leasing, trading, or profiting from an individual's or customer's biometric identifier or biometric information (Beltrán and Calvo, 2023 ).…”