Hedging Risk in Biometric Identification Management Deployments

As biometric identification management deployments continue to evolve around the world, the scope and complexity of administering these projects continue to grow as program administrators begin to expand the technology’s reach to more and more segments of society. A technology once used exclusively by government entities mostly in a military capacity has expanded to include virtually all classes and cultures thanks in large part to advances in system inefficiencies, lower costs and wider acceptance and understanding of the benefits by the public.

The intricacies and conditions of biometric identification deployments from initial set up to enrollment to identification/verification and the ever-present push to achieve near 100% identification accuracy has been a key motivator for biometric identification management vendors who design and build the software and hardware that power deployments. There is little doubt that biometric systems have become more user-friendly, customizable, ergonomic, and efficient, however, end users don’t assess the effectiveness or develop opinions on the use of biometrics based on these factors. They are much more in tune with the basic tenet of just about any piece of technology they come in contact with — does it work and do I trust it? Faith and trust in a biometric identification system are largely defined by the ability of the technology to accomplish what it promises and that is to accurately identify individuals, no matter what the conditions.

End users expectations are that biometric identity management systems will be able to identify them regardless of the condition of their own physiological attributes or the environment where the system is used. After all, the effectiveness and security of a biometric system hinges on its ability to enroll as many eligible end users as possible, and accurately identify them on subsequent use of the system. Unfortunately, limitations in the ability of certain biometric hardware modalities to effectively capture individual biometrics due to problems like skin integrity, or climate, as well as the use of unimodal (biometric systems that comprise one hardware modality) systems for larger scale deployments, raise the risk that the technology will not perform as expected.

Comments

Iris Recognition vs. Retina Scanning – What are the Differences?

In biometrics, iris and retinal scanning are known as “ocular-based” identification technologies, meaning they rely on unique physiological characteristics of the eye to identify an individual. Even though they both share part of the eye for identification purposes, these biometric modalities are quite different in how they work. Let’s take a closer look at both and then explain the similarities and differences in detail: Retinal Scanning: The human retina is a thin tissue composed of neural cells that are located in the posterior portion of the eye. Because of the complex structure of the capillaries that supply the retina with blood, each person’s retina is unique. The network of blood vessels in the retina is so complex that even identical twins do not share a similar pattern. Although retinal patterns may be altered in cases of diabetes, glaucoma or retinal degenerative disorders, the retina typically remains unchanged from birth until death. (Source: Wikipedia) ...

False Rejection Rate – What Does It Mean And Why Should I Care?

False reject rate is a statistic used to measure biometric performance when operating in the verification task and it usually calculated as the percentage of times the system produces a false reject. A false reject occurs when an individual is not matched to their own existing biometric template. For example: John claims to be John, but the system incorrectly denies the verification. This can be particularly frustrating for an end user who knows that they are enrolled in the system and should be recognized and verified, but for some reason the system is incorrectly rejecting their scan. This can cause unnecessary logjams, affect service, frustrate staff and negatively impact productivity.

Biometric Authentication to Stop Money Laundering in Pakistan

Recently The State Bank of Pakistan has mandated all of its banks to start verifying all of their account holders using biometric technology. The goal of this exercise is to stop money laundering in Pakistan. In the past; opening a bank account only requires the account holder’s details in printed/written form along with their id cards. However, after this current announcement, to open a bank account in Pakistan, one has to provide biometric data using an e-registration system. This procedure is also applicable for those who have registered before without biometric verification process. Many private banks throughout the globe have already deployed biometric identification solution to reduce fraud at their banks. Biometric technology help banks to know their customers better and revolutionize their KYC process. After implementing the biometric solution from M2SYS for customer identification in the microcredit loan process, this helped Grupo Monge (Costa Rican Capital Corpor...

Biometrics Technology

Search This Blog