Meta's Smart Glasses Are Testing Facial Recognition Software Used by Police and the Military

Meta's smart glasses are raising surveillance concerns again.

Omar Gallaga

Omar Gallaga has covered technology, digital culture and other topics for outlets including CNET, NPR, WIRED, Texas Monthly, MSNBC, Consumer Reports, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, The Atlantic and the Austin American-Statesman, where he was a longtime tech reporter, editor and podcaster. He lives in the Texas Hill Country.

3 min read

Meta Ray-Bans have been under increased public scrutiny following revelations about the facial recognition work Meta has been doing on its smart glasses. Consumers are rightly wary of products that could convert wearable tech into everyday surveillance devices.

In early June, an investigation by Wired exposed how Meta had quietly embedded code for dormant facial recognition software under the internal designation "NameTag." The feature, if rolled out, could have allowed Meta smart glasses to biometrically identify anyone in view -- in real time, without consent -- using a stored digital faceprint. The code, which was never made active for users, was removed a day later.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation's Threat Lab verified the initial findings and reported that Meta reversed course following public blowback. But the privacy nonprofit noted that Meta deleting the code "does not equal a permanent change of heart."

Now, just a week after Meta removed the code, the company is facing new questions about its facial recognition software prototype. A new investigation by Wired uncovered that Meta partnered with Rank One Computing, a supplier for the US military and law enforcement agencies, for its biometric identification technology. Wired said it uncovered a software license tying the Pentagon vendor to the Meta AI app, the same one used for Meta's smart glasses products.

The license agreement would authorize Meta to use Rank One's military-grade facial recognition and "liveness detection," which confirms whether someone is seeing a live person or a mask or photo. This business relationship, as Wired pointed out, "shows how thin the line has grown between the surveillance technology sold to law enforcement and the military and the consumer products sold to everyone else."

According to Wired, Rank One Computing declined to comment on the findings. The Denver-based firm, which earns roughly 80% of its revenue from government clients, didn't respond to a request from CNET for comment.

A Meta spokesperson told CNET that it has made no final decisions on facial recognition software for Meta Glasses, but would not confirm whether the tech giant is licensing a military-grade engine for its glasses. In an emailed statement, Meta noted: "Nothing has shipped to consumers and no final decision has been made on what to do here, if anything. If we do decide to roll something out, we will take a thoughtful approach and do so with full transparency."

Meta's facial recognition controversies

In our previous coverage, CNET noted a dangerous precedent if Meta's glasses store biometric face data in an embedded database architecture that can compare new faceprints to existing ones. At the time, a Meta spokesperson responded that the company is "not building a central face database."

In late 2021, under public pressure, Meta announced plans to shut down its efforts to build a central facial recognition database on the Facebook platform. By that point, the company said, about 600 million users globally had already opted into the software, which could identify faces in photos and videos for tagging people on the social media site. Meta later settled a 2024 lawsuit filed by the state of Texas over the collection of facial recognition data for $1.4 billion.

Earlier this year, the New York Times reported that Meta was developing software for its smart glasses to identify people, presumably using data from its social networks, such as Facebook and Instagram. The article cited an internal memo from Meta that said political tumult in the US would distract critics from the feature's release.

Privacy advocacy groups such as the EFF have long spelled out the harms of facial recognition technology, as biometric-enabled public surveillance severely undermines anonymity. Facial recognition technology also has a disproportionately negative impact on marginalized groups, as it can track movement, misidentify people of color and lead to wrongful arrests. Businesses and governments can also abuse faceprints without consent, creating risks for identity theft and cybersecurity.

OMAR GALLAGA

Omar Gallaga has covered technology, digital culture and other topics for outlets including CNET, NPR, WIRED, Texas Monthly, MSNBC, Consumer Reports, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, The Atlantic and the Austin American-Statesman, where he was a longtime tech reporter, editor and podcaster. He lives in the Texas Hill Country. See full bio