In a swift response to public scrutiny, Meta has removed significant portions of an unreleased facial recognition system from the companion app for its Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses. The removal comes just one day after WIRED published a detailed report revealing that the company had quietly embedded the technology—internally code-named NameTag—into the Meta AI app, which has been downloaded over 50 million times.
The most recent update to the app, released on Friday, strips out the unactivated software components that powered NameTag. An analysis by WIRED confirmed that the version published on the day of its report included multiple code libraries explicitly named for face recognition, while Friday’s release contains none of them. Meta’s vice president of communications, Andy Stone, told WIRED that the feature was purely exploratory, adding, “No final decision has been made on what to do here, if anything.”
What Was NameTag?
NameTag, first reported by The New York Times in February, was designed to convert faces captured by the smart glasses into unique biometric signatures, commonly known as faceprints. These signatures would then be compared against a database of faceprints stored locally on the user’s device. According to internal documents obtained by the Times, Meta weighed releasing the feature as early as 2024, with one memo reportedly describing a launch during a dynamic political environment when privacy advocates would be distracted.
WIRED’s investigation last week revealed that much of NameTag’s machinery had been built into the Meta AI app as early as January—months before Meta publicly acknowledged exploring facial recognition. The app was found to contain code that cropped, indexed, and stored locally the faces of people the system failed to recognize, potentially creating a repository of biometric data without users’ explicit consent.
Meta’s Dismissive Response
After WIRED’s report, Meta executives pushed back aggressively. Stone dismissed the findings, writing that the company could not answer questions about how the system would work because “the feature does not exist.” Chief Technology Officer Andrew Bosworth called the reporting “incredibly misleading” and “absolutely dishonest.” However, the removal of the code suggests that the feature did, in fact, exist in a ready-to-activate state.
Before publishing, WIRED sent Meta a list of 10 questions, including whether the company had already created the database of face profiles NameTag uses, how long the app retains photographs and biometric data of unrecognized people stored on a user’s device, and whether that data would ever be sent back to Meta’s servers. Meta declined to answer any of them. It also did not respond to questions about whether NameTag was being built specifically for blind or low-vision users—a use case Meta had floated internally—or how users could opt in or out of the system.
What Remains in the App
While the latest version of Meta AI removes nearly all traces of NameTag, a few fragments persist. These include an internal debug menu label and a dormant link intended to open a recognized person’s profile. The leftover code points to parts of the system that are no longer present, serving as a ghostly reminder of what was there.
Kade Crockford, director of the technology for liberty program at the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, argues that the removal does not undo the original decision to ship the code. “Meta’s sneaky tactics show exactly why data privacy bills need the teeth of strong enforcement,” Crockford said. They pointed to a consumer privacy bill that the Massachusetts House of Representatives unanimously passed last week, which would impose strong enforcement provisions if enacted as written. Crockford urged other states to follow, especially by including a private right of action that lets aggrieved users sue.
Broader Context: Facial Recognition and Privacy
This incident is the latest in a long history of controversy surrounding facial recognition technology. Meta (then Facebook) faced a class-action lawsuit over its use of facial recognition in photo tagging, which it settled for $650 million in 2020. The company later shut down its Face Recognition system on Facebook in 2021, citing regulatory uncertainty. Yet the NameTag feature suggests Meta never abandoned the underlying technology.
Privacy advocates have long warned that facial recognition on wearable devices like smart glasses could enable stalking, harassment, and unwarranted surveillance. Unlike smartphones, which require users to point and hold a camera, smart glasses can capture faces passively and continuously, potentially identifying strangers in public without their knowledge. This raises significant ethical questions about consent and the normalization of ubiquitous identification.
Meta’s smart glasses, developed in partnership with EssilorLuxottica, have been marketed as a stylish and functional accessory for capturing everyday moments. However, the inclusion of facial recognition software—even in an inactive state—highlights the company’s ambitions to integrate highly personal data collection into a device designed to be worn constantly.
Regulatory and Industry Reactions
The removal of the code is likely a tactical retreat rather than a permanent abandonment of the project. Glasshole 2.0, as some critics have dubbed the era of smart glasses, may still be on the horizon. But the backlash shows that public and regulatory sensitivity to facial recognition remains high. In the European Union, the AI Act imposes strict limitations on biometric identification in public spaces, while several U.S. cities have banned government use of facial recognition.
Industry analysts note that Meta’s move to pull the code so quickly suggests it is trying to avoid escalating regulatory scrutiny or consumer backlash that could harm the adoption of its smart glasses. Sales of the Ray-Ban Meta have been moderate, and any privacy scandal could derail the product’s growth potential.
The episode also raises questions about the app review processes of major platforms. Meta AI is distributed through the Apple App Store and Google Play Store. It is unclear whether either company’s review process flagged the presence of facial recognition code or whether they would have approved the activation of such a feature without explicit user consent notices.
As for the users who have already downloaded the app, the removal of the code means that any facial recognition capabilities that may have been present are no longer accessible—even if the app had been updated prior to the removal. However, privacy experts advise consumers to remain cautious. The history of technology companies re-enabling dormant features through silent updates is well documented.
Meta did not answer WIRED’s questions about why the code was removed or whether the changes were planned before the story was published. The company also declined to say if it intends to reintroduce NameTag in the future. Given the company’s track record, it would be unwise to assume this is the last we have heard of facial recognition on smart glasses.
The incident serves as a reminder that the line between exploratory innovation and invasive surveillance is often blurry. As smart glasses become more common, the debate over facial recognition is likely to intensify, pushing lawmakers and companies to decide what kind of privacy future we are building.
Source:Ars Technica News