RSSBiometrics Come of Age
By David Worthington | Published November 2, 2001, 2:47 AM
Biometric security -- the bane of civil libertarians -- has never been associated with convenience, and has been relegated to a reputation of being cumbersome and inconvenient. By recording certain biological characteristics such as facial patterns, fingerprints, or even the iris of an eye, biometrics has been billed as an end all solution for "locking out" unwanted visitors. At the Partner Pavillion during last week's Windows XP launch events, DigitalPersona's U.are.U Personal stood out as one of the most innovative products being showcased on the floor by defying the conventions that surround biometric technology.
Both Microsoft and DigitalPersona were demonstrating U.are.U Personal's touted fast user switching, a way to change user profiles without logging out and closing applications – minus the need to type in passwords. Ideally, a USB finger sensor allows instant recognition that transcends user switching by using DigitalPersona's special software to interact with Web sites, replacing passwords on the fly. The software package includes a utility to encrypt selected files with one touch as well.
BetaNews had the chance to evaluate U.are.U Personal in person. Rather than watch the pre-fabricated dog and pony display show, we asked to create our own user account on the sample machines.
There is a four step process to create a user account. Someone with administrative rights must initiate the process that loads a wizard to guide a new user through the registration process. Four fingerprint samplings are required in order to create an accurate model for recognition. A new account was created without a hitch, and we were able to access our Windows session instantly by touching the sensor pad.
One obvious characteristic of the software was that it bypassed the start menu by loading a clone that floats around on the desktop. Although seemingly benign, this fact alone raised questions about the level of integration the company has able to achieve with the operating system. Chief Technology Officer Vance Bjorn remained unfettered, telling BetaNews that U.are.U Personal is native code compatible with Windows XP.
According to Bjorn, both companies worked hand in hand to develop biometric technology for Windows. "We are excited to see DigitalPersona's innovation in making biometric authentication affordable for all PC users," said John Frederiksen, general manger of marketing for Windows at Microsoft Corp. "Because U.are.U Personal is optimized for Fast User Switching in Windows XP, the logon procedure is more secure, faster and easier, especially for homes and small businesses where multiple users share PCs."
Fabio Righi, President and CEO of DigitalPersona weighed in, "U.are.U Personal is the latest in our line of personal security solutions, and it is a significant step forward in providing convenient security for home and SOHO users of Windows XP. Even if you share a PC, your files, bookmarks, Internet history, email and all your personal data, are available with a touch of your finger to you alone."
The product is available exclusively through DigitalPersona's Web site, and is listed among the special offers aimed at sweetening the deal to upgrade to Microsoft's latest on the Windows XP Web site. U.are.U Personal retails at an introductory price of $69.00 USD. Digital Persona has spent roughly five years developing fingerprinting technology.
Alternative product offerings are available from Cogent Systems, Identix, Fidelica Microsystems, and Veridicom.
Was this article meant as an advertisement for Digital Persona? Why are all the questions focusing on the much more expensive retinal and iris scanning, both of which are still much too EXPENSIVE for broad use, do not have the following or acceptance of fingerprint minutiae-based biometrics, and worst of all, are considered PASSIVE (read INTRUSIVE).
Identix has a much more extensive history in the biometric arena (TWENTY YEARS vs. 5 for U are U), superior software/hardware with a ZERO false acceptance rate (vs. about 50% failure rate for facial recognition), true end-to-end solutions that EDS, MOT, VRSN, Eclypsis and other big name companies are selecting (for major deployments in military, health care and financial arenas). IDNX has all three top tier box makers (CPQ, DELL and Toshiba) embedding or OEM'ing their products. The US Govt picked IDNX algorithms as the TEMPLATE for BioAPI-related security. IDNX is the ONLY company with products CERTIFIED for Win2000 and they're a gold certified partner of MSFT for WinXP (IDX was demoed in SanFrancisco AND 2000 MSFT sales reps carry Identix on their laptops to demo to potential clients).
Wonder if my post will be deleted, too??
Score: 0
"Wonder if my post will be deleted, too??"
Why would you post be deleted? Do you have issues?
"Why are all the questions focusing on the much more expensive retinal and iris scanning"
I'm focusing on the 'much more expensive' iris scanning becase as i mentioned from what I have read on biometrics, Iris scanning is 'much more secure' (read 100% fool proof). Is price really the most important thing when it comes to security?
Score: 0
Chris, the only "issue" that caused me to muse about deletion stems from my learning that a friend announced that his post HAD been deleted. BetaNews added Identix to the hyperlinks at the bottom of the article, but the links themselves are curious. Fidelica? A new entrant tied to Bioscript, and Veridicom, bankrupt and reborn overseas. Sheesh. Everyone claims to be a "world leader". Identix actually is.
As for me asking why the posts to an article/advertisement for FP solutions seemed to focus virtually entirely on iris/retinal products, I think that was legitimate. I expected the common myth promulgators to post (spoofing scanners myths- dead finger, hygeine red herring, hackers myths), but not a peep about the true leader in FP (or for that matter, no comments about the pros and cons of facial recog, either)
While you're certainly correct about iris scanning being virtually foolproof (as is FP), cost IS an BIG issue for many companies, as is the PASSIVE vs ACTIVE biometric debate and speed (tap of a fingertip vs. stop and stare), or the utilitarian aspect of broad deployments tied to existing databases. While fingerprint minutiae can't be reverse engineered into fingerprints, I believe it is backwards compatible with forensic FP dbases. Iris will have its niche, but FP will eventually become ubiquitous.
Score: 0
Sorry! I accidentally deleted it, but added Indentix to the article.
-Dave
Score: 0
Did you 'guys' try and fool/break it? i.e. seeing how it would work with dirty hands etc etc?
Also, do you know if there's going to be a version of U.are.U but using retinal scans? From what I have read in regards to biometrics, retinal scans are 100% fool proof, i.e. they can detect wether the person is alive or dead and it is more accurate than DNA, finger prints etc.
Score: 0
Retinal scans aren't 100% accurate though because your retinas change at times like pregnancy.
Score: 0
We were on the floor and could not "dirty" the display. If I am able to obtain a unit for evalution I will put it through the ropes. Currently, they do not have any retinal scanning technology.
-Dave
Score: 0
Unless, of course, you're male. Then you have more than retinal scans to worry about.
Score: 0
Thanks for the info. I'd be curious to get a retinal scanner and software just to play around, see how well it actually works. After all, if they can 'perfect' these biometrics then we can be rid of logins and passwords, something I for one will be glad to do.
Score: 0
I have an opportunity to use the Iridian IrisScan products under XP and they worked flawlessly. BTW, typically the iris doesn't change from about 6 months of age to death. It is also the only biometric never to give a false positive reading.
Score: 0
That's the impression I was under from reading up on biometrics, not sure about the 'pregnancy' thing, but it might be valid. Might take a look at IrisScan thanks.
Score: 0
Have these retinal scanners been tested in people with retinal complications in Diabetes. And in people who have chronic glaucoma? And people who have retinal changes due to malignant or accelerated hypertension? What about people who have cateracts in varying degrees of evolution? Do they work when one is wearing contact lenses?
Sppire
Score: 0
Sorry I meant Iris scanners not Retinal scanners, and the example given by tkmiller is the correct one (or at least the one I meant), i.e. an Iris scanner. These are apparently 100% fool proof as the iris does not change, the retina? (spelling?) can change.
Score: 0