I think the point he wants to make is that the biometric data itself is raw and nothing about it is "tagged" to discern between collaborators and common people,

I think the point he wants to make is that the biometric data itself is raw and nothing about it is "tagged" to discern between collaborators and common people, nor is it circumstantially implied that all of the data belonged to collaborators, because all of the population - not just collaborators - were catalogued. For some reason people seem to immediately jump to the conclusion that a) every collaborator is now at risk, because b) this raw data is functionally identical to the final processed and augmented database that was built using this raw data.