US report casts doubt on "reliable" biometric systems

 

Back to the drawing board for security designers.

The reliability, accuracy and scalability of biometric security systems has been called into question by a scathing report from The National Research Council (NRC) in the US.

The “Biometric Recognition: Challenges and Opportunities” report has scotched the myth that biometrics are trustworthy and secure, describing them as “inherently fallible”.

Although the results have created a stir in the security world, the report was produced as a scholarly overview of the science behind biometrics. Its conclusion that no single biometric trait has been identified as stable or distinctive has placed doubt about the reliability of fingerprint, iris patterns, voice recognition and facial recognition systems.

NRC assembled a panel chaired by Joseph Pato, a distinguished scientist at HP Labs. The rest of the membership was drawn from industry, academia and the analyst community.

“While there are lots of good uses for biometric recognition, there are lots of ways to create systems that waste time, cost too much and don’t work very well,” said panel member Bob Blakley, a research vice president at analyst firm Gartner.

The news will come as further ammunition for the UK Government. The coalition halted plans for an autumn 2010 introduction of “second generation” passports that would have included fingerprint records.

Its argument was the need to cut costs but now the report would support an argument that it represented a bad return on investment.

The NRC report cautioned that basic research into the reliability of the physical characteristics has been ignored. These characteristics change with age, illness, stress and other factors.

"Bolstering the science is essential to gain a complete understanding of the strengths and limitations of these systems," Pato explained.

Biometric systems provide "probabilistic results", the report said, by which it meant that confidence in the results must be tempered by an understanding of these inherent uncertainties. Furthermore, variable results have stemmed from technical issues regarding the calibration of sensors, degradation of data, and fraudulent entries made through security breaches.

Deployment of biometric screening devices at airports and other checkpoints without understanding the biology or the population being screened would lead to long queues, delays caused by false positives and missed opportunities to catch criminals or terrorists, the report concludes.

This article originally appeared at itpro.co.uk

Copyright © ITPro, Dennis Publishing


US report casts doubt on "reliable" biometric systems
"i wrote a paper on palmprint biometrics for my honours and it seems strange to me that this would really be the case. Firstly, accuracy with biometric algorithms and development in the area has ..."
By RossR
 
 
 
Comments: 3
johnpro2
Oct 1, 2010 7:45 AM
As no security system is 100% reliable 100% of the time.One that catches the bulk of security breaches is better than no system.
Society does live with a certain amount of crime, just like road deaths/injuries are part of the car culture and usually far more serious.
btone
Oct 1, 2010 12:08 PM
Indeed, collateral damage is clearly an acceptable factor of modern life and control systems. A few websites incorrectly banned, a few dark skinned nonentities incorrectly thrown into Quantonomo Bay and a few less annoying dissident voices criticising corporate/government 'improvements' in security for us all surely is an easy price to pay, eh? Have a nice day y'all, unless you set off an alarm on the scanner that is, and please trust the minimum wage clone in the uniform, he/she is as reliable and accurate as the machine...
RossR
Oct 2, 2010 9:20 PM
i wrote a paper on palmprint biometrics for my honours and it seems strange to me that this would really be the case. Firstly, accuracy with biometric algorithms and development in the area has greatly increased in the last 20 years, going from ink based comparisons by person to reasonably accurate automated comparison by computer. Secondly, biometrics still has huge potential and room for progress, and is still in early its early years. Third, you must look at the work with iris recognition by John Daugman! and the subsequent system implemented in the UAE! much more reliable for identification than passwords which can be transferred or forgotten. I haven't read this report but hope it highlights improvement areas rather than casting such a dim light on a promising almost emerged technology.
Comments have been disabled for this article.
 
 
 
Top Stories
Australian miners send drones to work
In-depth: Unmanned aerial vehicles in the resources sector.
 
The New Zealand telco problem
Opinion: Could Telstra save Kiwi telcos?
 
IT price probe to 'name and shame' gougers
Industry ducking the issue, committee claims.
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...

Latest VideosSee all videos »

Latest Comments
Polls
Should the Government enact new legislation to protect copyright holders in the digital age?

   |   View results
Yes
  20%
 
No
  80%
TOTAL VOTES: 507

Vote