Identity/biometrics/technology marketing and writing services
What are the elements of an Automated Biometric Identification System?
An ABIS begins with an orchestration/workflow controller.
And includes interfaces, processing, matching, and storage.
This was true even before I managed the Printrak BIS product.
And remains true today.
Some of you may have already read my shorter books, including “Seven Questions Your Content Creator Should Ask You.” They’re short, and they’re free.
Last December I started writing something more comprehensive, and long enough to sell. If I price each copy at $100,000 apiece and sell 25 of them, I can start thinking about retirement.
Despite the (completely realistic) financial incentive, I dropped the project and didn’t pick it back up again until this month. I’m not ready to announce it yet, but the very fact that I’m talking about it may give me the impetus to finish it.
I just uploaded the latest draft to Google Gemini, both to write a 100 word promotional blurb (which I may or may not use or adapt), and to write two book reviews: one positive, one negative.
Again without giving away too much about the book, here are two excerpts from the negative review.
“Author John E. Bredehoft spends significant time on self-promotion and anecdotal stories, such as his hypothetical attempt to access Donald Trump’s medical records, which may distract readers seeking deep technical data.”
Here’s the second:
“While the writing is accessible, those looking for a dense, scholarly analysis of biometric algorithms might find the conversational tone and frequent “investigative lead” reminders a bit repetitive.”
Hey, there weren’t THAT many…
More to come.
Yeah, I’m still focused on that statement:
“I think too much knowledge is actually bad in tech: you’re biased.”
Why does this quote affect me so deeply? Because with my 30-plus years of identity/biometric experience, I obviously have too much knowledge of the industry, which is obviously bad. After all, all a biometric company needs is a salesperson, an engineer, an African data labeler, and someone to run the generative AI for everything else. The company doesn’t need someone who knows that Printrak isn’t spelled with a C.
In this post I will share three of the “biases” I have developed in my 30-plus years in identity and biometrics, and how to correct these biases by stripping away that 20th century experience and applying novel thinking.
And if that last paragraph made you throw up in your mouth…read to the end of the post.
But first, let’s briefly explore these three biases that I shamefully hold due to my status as a biometric product marketing expert:
Biometric products need algorithms to encode and match the biometric samples, and ideally to detect presentation and injection attacks.
But how do prospects know that these algorithms work? How accurate are they? How fast are they? How secure are they?
My brain, embedded with over 30 years of bias, gravitates to the idea that vendors should submit their algorithms for independent testing and confirmation.
This could be an accuracy test such as the ones NIST and DHS administer, or confirmation of presentation attack detection capabilities (as BixeLab, iBeta, and other organizations perform), or confirmation of injection attack detection capabilities.
But you’re smarter than that and refuse to support the testing-industrial complex. They have their explicit or implicit agendas and want to force the biometric vendors to do well on the tests. For example, the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation’s “Appendix F” fingerprint capture quality standard specifically EXCLUDES contactless solutions, forcing everyone down the same contact path.
But you and your novel thinking reject these unnecessary impediments. You’re not going to constrain yourself by the assertions of others. You are going to assert your own benefits. Develop and administer your own tests. Share with your prospects how wonderful you are without going through an intermediary. That will prove your superiority…right?
A biometric company has to perform a variety of tasks. Raise funding. Hire people. Develop, market, propose, sell, and implement products. Throw parties.
How will the company do all these things?
My brain, encumbered by my experience (including a decade at Motorola), persists in a belief that process is the answer. The process can be as simple as scribblings on a cocktail napkin, but you need some process if you want to cash out in a glorious exit—I mean, deliver superior products to your customers.
Perhaps you need a development processs that defines, among other things, how long a sprint should be. A capture and proposal process (Shipley or simpler) that defines, among other things, who has the authority to approve a $10 million proposal A go-to-market process that defines the deliverables for different tiers, and who is responsible, accountable, consulted, and informed. Or maybe just an onboarding process when starting a new project, dictating the questions you need to ask at the beginning.
Sure all that process is fine…if you don’t want to do anything. Do you really want to force your people to wait two weeks for the latest product iteration? Impose a multinational bureauracy on your sales process? Go through an onerous checklist before marketing a product?
Just code it.
Just sell it.
Just write it.
The problem with experienced people is that they think that there is nothing new under the sun.
You talk about cloud computing, and they yawn, “Sounds like time sharing.” You talk about quantum computing, and they yawn, “Sounds like the Pentium.” You talk about blockchain, and they yawn, “Sounds like a notary public.”
As I sip my Pepperidge Farm, I can barely conceal my revulsion at those who think “we use AI” is a world-dominating marketing message. Artificial intelligence is not a way of life. It is a tool. A tool that in and of itself does not merit much of a mention.
How many automobile manufacturers proclaim “we use tires” as part of their marketing messaging? Tires are essential to an automobile’s performance, but since everyone has them, they’re not a differentiator and not worthy of mention.
In the same way, everyone has AI…so why talk about its mere presence? Talk about the benefits your implementation provides and how these benefits differentiate you from your competitors.
Yep, the grandpas that declare “AI is only a tool” are missing the significance entirely. AI is not like a Pentium chip. It is a transformational technology that is already changing the way we create, sell, and market.
Therefore it is critically important to highlight your product’s AI use. AI isn’t a “so what” feature, but an indication of revolutionary transformative technology. You suppress mention of AI at your own peril.
OK, so I’ve identified the outmoded thinking that results from too much experience. But how do I overcome it?
I don’t.
Because if you haven’t already detected it, I believe that experience IS valuable, and that all three items above are essential and shouldn’t be jettisoned for the new, novel, and kewl.
Bredemarket can help with strategy, analysis, content, and/or proposals for your identity/biometric firm. Talk to me (for free).
By the way, here’s MY process (and my services and pricing).
Regardless of the concerns of Europeans and others about U.S. de facto governance of biometric standards, countries around the world still base their data interchange formats on a document written by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and approved by the American National Standards Institute.
This document has been revised many times over the years. I first worked with the 1993 version of the document, which concentrated on binary and grayscale fingerprints with resolutions as high as 500 pixels per inch, but sometimes lower.
The new 2025 version (PDF), released in March 2026, covers a lot more. And sometimes a lot less.
Note the “deprecated” and “legacy” data types. In 1993, Type 4 was the gold standard for fingerprint images; now it’s just “legacy.” And forget about binary representations or anything less than 500 ppi.
Time marches on.
But some people have been around for much of the ride. I scanned the lists of working group members and found Kenneth Blue, Tom Buss, Roland Fournier, Patrick Grother, Mike McCabe, John Splain, Mark Walch, and many others who remember Type 4 and 250 ppi binary images.
And the canvassees included government and industry representatives from within and outside of the United States, including Canada, Germany, Japan, Latvia, Slovakia, Switzerland, other countries I probably mnissed, and INTERPOL.
If Europe or other countries do break away from NIST standards, it will be a rupturing break.
The image at the top of this post was taken from the NIST website and is a from an interoperability slide in a 2016 FBI presentation. Although the reference to “IAFIS” suggests that the image was created long before 2016. No NGI, and no HART either.
Because—while this may make some uncomfortable—biometric interoperability between the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, and Justice is critically important.
For years after 9/11, the (then) systems from the three Departments were NOT interoperable.
Which made it difficult to identify if a military person or citizenship applicant was a criminal.
Today, while the three current systems use three different data interchange standards (based upon work by NIST), they CAN talk to each other.
We just have to ensure that the interoperability is legal and proper.
Back in 2024 I wrote about contraction in the identity/biometric industry.
In retrospect, that industry has been lucky.
At the time I wrote this (yes, this is a scheduled post), I knew of few if any identity/biometric companies that had “right sized” half its staff. 10% maybe, but not 50%.
At least not yet.
I know that the experts say that “too much knowledge is actually bad in tech.” But based upon what I just saw from an (unnamed) identity verification company, I assert that too little knowledge is much worse.
As a biometric product marketing expert and biometric product marketing writer, I pay a lot of attention to how identity verification companies and other biometric and identity companies market themselves. Many companies know how to speak to their prospects…and many don’t.
Take a particular company, which I will not name. Here is the “marketing” from this company.
So what is the difference between this company and the other 100+ identity verification companies…many of which explicitly state their benefits, trumpet their NIST FRTE performance, and trumpet their third-party liveness detection confirmation letters?
If you claim great accuracy and great liveness detection but can’t support it via independent third-party verification, your claim is “so what?” worthless. Prove your claims.
Now I’m sure I could help this company. Even if they have none of the certifications or confirmations I mentioned, I could at least get the company to focus on meaningful differentiation and meaningful benefits. But there’s no need to even craft a Bredemarket pitch to the company, since the only marketer on staff is an intern who is indifferent to strategy.
Because while many companies assert that all they need is a salesperson, an engineer, an African data labeler, and someone to run the generative AI for everything else…there are dozens of competitors doing the exact same thing.
But some aren’t. Some identity/biometric companies are paying attention to their long-term viability, and are creating content, proposals, and analyses that support that viability.
Take a look at your company’s marketing. Does it speak to prospects? Does it prove that you will meet your customers’ needs? Or does it sound like every other company that’s saying “We use AI. Trust us“?
And if YOUR company needs experienced help in conveying customer-focused benefits to your prospects…contact Bredemarket. I’ve delivered meaningful biometric materials to two dozen companies over the years. And yes, I have experience. Let me use it for your advantage.
While air traffic is disrupted by a much more urgent threat, the regular process of crossing borders is disrupted itself, Iran or no.
Ryanair runs a flight (FR4756) from Lanzarote, in the (Spanish) Canary Islands, to Bristol (England). Since the United Kingdom is not part of the European Union, its citizens must undergo biometric checks as part of the Entry/Exit System (EES). And that takes time.
“Eighty-nine passengers booked on flight FR4756 to Bristol were reportedly stuck in non-European Union (EU) lines awaiting passport checks. The airline held the aircraft for around an hour but ultimately departed without dozens of customers, offloading their checked baggage before takeoff.”
Ryanair claimed it was the passengers’ fault:
“Should these passengers have presented at the boarding gate desk before it closed, they would have boarded this flight.”
But when it takes longer to get through an airport’s security than you expect, a new type of friction results: incensed passengers.
Predictably, the airline industry is urging that EES be delayed. Kinda like what happened over here, where REAL ID still hasn’t really been implemented.
It’s easy to toss around phrases like “customer-focused benefits” without comprehending what they mean.
So I’ll provide an example.
Years ago I wanted to learn about a particular company—and no, I’m not going to name the company—so I read what it said about itself. And what did the company’s product marketing say?
“We’re a unicorn!”
For the benefit of normal people, when businesses talk about being a unicorn, they are saying that the firm, based upon funding from private investors, has a theoretical valuation of over $1 billion. For example, if Ventures R Us pays $100 million for 10% of the company.
Well, this company was really proud about its unicorn status, to the exclusion of everything else.
With reason, when you think about it.
Taking an example from my own industry, if you are the police chief of a medium sized city that needs an automated biometric identification system, would you risk buying one from a provider with an actual or theoretical valuation of less than $500 million?
Because isn’t company valuation the most important thing to a prospect?
What? It isn’t? Prospects care about results?
(For the record, you can buy a perfectly fine ABIS from firms with actual, not theoretical, values of less than $100 million.)
In fact, I would go so far as to say that if the first sentence of your company description includes the word “Series” followed by a letter from the beginning of the alphabet, your focus is the investment community rather than your prospects.
But if the first sentence of your company description talks about what you deliver to your customers, then you’ll impress both your prospects and the discerning investors. Nothing magical about that.
Take care in how you market your products.
Ease of use, and speed.
Bredemarket