Rite Aid hit with five-year facial recognition ban over ‘reckless’ use

[bnew]

Rite Aid hit with five-year facial recognition ban over “reckless” use

Rite Aid allegedly created a database of shoppers it flagged.

www.theverge.com

Rite Aid hit with five-year facial recognition ban over ‘reckless’ use

The Federal Trade Commission is also requiring the pharmacy chain to delete all the photos and videos it captured of customers.

By Emma Roth, a news writer who covers the streaming wars, consumer tech, crypto, social media, and much more. Previously, she was a writer and editor at MUO.

Dec 19, 2023, 7:09 PM EST|15 Comments / 15 New

​

Image: Getty

Rite Aid isn’t allowed to use AI-powered facial recognition technology for another five years as part of a settlement it reached with the Federal Trade Commission. In a complaint filed on Tuesday, the FTC accuses Rite Aid of using facial surveillance systems in a “reckless” manner from 2012 to 2020.

During this period, the FTC says Rite Aid used facial recognition technology to “capture images of all consumers as they entered or moved through the stores.” It then allegedly created a database of customers identified as shoplifters or exhibiting some other kind of suspicious behavior. For some customers, the database would have “accompanying information,” such as names, birth dates, and the activity deemed suspicious by the store, according to the complaint.

Rite Aid employees allegedly followed flagged customers around stores and performed searches

When a flagged shopper entered a Rite Aid store with facial recognition technology, the FTC says employees would receive a “match alert” sent to their mobile phones. As a result, Rite Aid employees allegedly followed customers around stores, performed searches, publicly accused them of shoplifting, and even asked the authorities to remove certain shoppers, according to the complaint. The FTC says Rite Aid falsely identified people as shoppers who had been previously flagged by the system, with incidents “disproportionality” impacting people of color.

Additionally, the pharmacy chain didn’t inform customers that it used facial recognition technology, and employees were “instructed employees not to reveal” this information, the complaint states. Most Rite Aid stores equipped with facial recognition technology were located in New York City, Los Angeles, Sacramento, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Detroit, Atlantic City, and a handful of other cities.

“Rite Aid’s reckless use of facial surveillance systems left its customers facing humiliation and other harms, and its order violations put consumers’ sensitive information at risk,” Samuel Levine, the FTC’s director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection, says in a statement. “Today’s groundbreaking order makes clear that the Commission will be vigilant in protecting the public from unfair biometric surveillance and unfair data security practices.”

Related

Clearview AI and the end of privacy, with author Kashmir Hill

IBM promised to back off facial recognition — then it signed a $69.8 million contract to provide it

In addition to a five-year ban from using facial recognition technology, the FTC’s proposed order requires Rite Aid to establish “comprehensive safeguards” to protect customers. The company must delete “all photos and videos” of customers collected by its facial recognition system, implement a data security program, and provide a written notice to customers who will have their biometric data enrolled in a database in the future, among other provisions. Since Rite Aid is currently going through bankruptcy proceedings, the FTC says the order will go into effect once the bankruptcy court and federal district court approve the measures.

Aside from Rite Aid, several retail stores have implemented facial recognition as a means to monitor guests. In 2021, Fight for the Future’s Ban Facial Recognition in Stores campaign had over 35 organizations demand that retailers like Albertsons, Macy’s, and Ace Hardware stop using the technology. Some states, including Maine, have carved out laws to regulate the use of facial recognition, while New York City requires that venues and retailers notify customers if biometric data collection is in use.

 

[Blackrogue]

Wait so it was being used to Flag people who had a history of doing shyt in their stores and alert employees that these people were now in their store?

 

[Richard Glidewell]

Another reason to cheer for their downfall.......I wonder if there is a way to find out if you are in the data base and sue their ass

 

[Richard Glidewell]

Wait so it was being used to Flag people who had a history of doing shyt in their stores and alert employees that these people were now in their store?

No, it captured EVERYONES image and information

 

[Amestafuu (Emeritus)]

This is why legislation matters with new tech. First of all we should fight to get stores to have to post information when they use facial recof technology in the premise. Especially when they are harvesting and storing all that data or accessing it. Then there's the issue of this tech being implemented and used against people of color when since the inception of AI and facial recognition tech they have stated that it is exceptionally poor at accurately identifying Black people. So here we have yet another Instance brehs being targeted and profiled with new tech that is bad at distinguishing non white faces but also has been programmed with bias against Black people.

It should not be In use universally if it can't work well for all faces and inadvertently ends up negatively impacting people of color

 

[Amestafuu (Emeritus)]

Wait so it was being used to Flag people who had a history of doing shyt in their stores and alert employees that these people were now in their store?

Read my post. It was mis identifying random shoppers as suspects who have stolen before. Also why should a store be able to hate access to information like my date of birth just because I'm shopping. Begs the question what database they are taped into and feeding these images to. This is highly invasive and goes beyond a businesses right to secure it's property