Meta Removes Face-Recognition Code From Smart Glasses App After WIRED Report

Code Disappeared After Exposure

One day after WIRED's report detailed the presence of an unactivated face-recognition system in Meta's smart glasses app, the code has been purged from the latest version of Meta AI. The most recent release of the companion app for Meta's smart glasses no longer contains any of the software components that powered the internal NameTag system. This removal comes after WIRED identified several code libraries explicitly named for face recognition in the day of publication's build.

Andy Stone, Meta's vice president of communications, responded to WIRED's findings by asserting that the feature is only exploratory and that no final decision has been made regarding its future. However, Meta did not respond to 10 specific questions raised by WIRED before publication, including how long facial data would be stored locally or whether it could be transmitted back to Meta's servers.

Face Recognition: A Hidden Feature

The NameTag system was first reported in February by The New York Times, which cited internal documents suggesting that Meta was exploring the use of face recognition for its smart glasses. That effort reportedly included plans to release the feature during a period of political tension when public concern over privacy would be diminished.

WIRED's investigation found that NameTag's underlying infrastructure had already been integrated into the Meta AI app as early as January, even though Meta publicly maintained it hadn't made any final decisions. The system was designed to capture faces through the glasses and convert them into biometric signatures known as faceprints. These were compared against a database of stored faceprints on users' devices, with unrecognized faces being cropped, indexed, and stored locally for possible future processing.

“The feature does not exist,” said Meta's vice president of communications Andy Stone when asked about the system's status.

Meta's Evading Accountability

In response to WIRED's reporting, Meta dismissed the claims as misleading and dishonest. Chief Technology Officer Andrew Bosworth called the coverage “absolutely dishonest.” The company declined to answer key questions, including whether it had already created a database of face profiles used by NameTag, how long facial data would be retained, and whether that data would ever be sent back to Meta's servers.

Meta also did not respond to inquiries about whether the system was built specifically for blind or low-vision users or whether users could opt in or out of its use. Critics argue that such a feature—despite being dormant—could pose significant risks, particularly to vulnerable groups like victims of stalking or domestic abuse.

After Removal: What's Left?

The updated Meta AI app removes nearly all traces of the NameTag system. The face-recognition software itself, along with code managing the recognition process and alerting users when a person is identified, have been stripped out. Additionally, the folder where cropped images and biometric signatures of unrecognized faces were stored has also been eliminated.

However, a few fragments of the original NameTag code remain, such as an internal debug menu label and a dormant link meant to open a recognized person's profile—indicating that while the system is no longer functional, some remnants linger in the codebase. Meta did not provide insight into why this code was removed or whether those changes were pre-existing before WIRED's story went public.

Privacy Advocates Raise Concerns

Kade Crockford, director of the technology for liberty program at the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, pointed to the removal as further evidence of Meta's secretive approach. Crockford noted that while the code was removed, it wasn't erased from history, and emphasized the need for stronger legal protections around digital privacy.

He cited Massachusetts' recent passage of a comprehensive consumer privacy bill as a model for how states can take action in the face of corporate negligence. The bill includes strong enforcement provisions and allows individuals to sue companies directly—a step Crockford said is crucial in holding big tech accountable.

“Meta's sneaky tactics in slipping the face-recognition code into its smart glasses show exactly why data privacy bills need the teeth of strong enforcement,” Crockford said. “Companies like Meta prioritize their bottom line, so lawmakers need to speak in the only language its C-suite understands.”

The Bigger Picture: Data Transparency and Oversight

This incident raises serious questions about transparency and oversight in tech development. As companies like Meta integrate more sophisticated AI features into everyday products, it becomes increasingly critical for the public to understand what is—and isn't—being collected, processed, or stored on their devices.

The case of NameTag illustrates how easily hidden systems can slip through the cracks, especially when they are not publicly announced. While Meta has removed the code, its actions do little to restore trust, particularly for those who value their privacy and safety online. This event underscores a broader concern: that corporate control over digital spaces often outpaces legal safeguards designed to protect users.

For readers seeking more insight into Meta's AI practices, ongoing monitoring of product updates, public disclosures, and regulatory responses will be essential in understanding how such developments evolve—and whether meaningful accountability follows.