fingerprint – Page 8

We Survived Gummy Fingers. We’re Surviving Facial Recognition Inaccuracy. We’ll Survive Voice Spoofing.

(Part of the biometric product marketing expert series)

Some of you are probably going to get into an automobile today.

Are you insane?

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has released its latest projections for traffic fatalities in 2022, estimating that 42,795 people died in motor vehicle traffic crashes.
From https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/traffic-crash-death-estimates-2022

When you have tens of thousands of people dying, then the only conscionable response is to ban automobiles altogether. Any other action or inaction is completely irresponsible.

After all, you can ask the experts who want us to ban biometrics because it can be spoofed and is racist, so therefore we shouldn’t use biometrics at all.

I disagree with the calls to ban biometrics, and I’ll go through three “biometrics are bad” examples and say why banning biometrics is NOT justified.

Even some identity professionals may not know about the old “gummy fingers” story from 20+ years ago.
And yes, I know that I’ve talked about Gender Shades ad nauseum, but it bears repeating again.
And voice deepfakes are always a good topic to discuss in our AI-obsessed world.

Example 1: Gummy fingers

My recent post “Why Apple Vision Pro Is a Technological Biometric Advance, but Not a Revolutionary Biometric Event” included the following sentence:

But the iris security was breached by a “dummy eye” just a month later, in the same way that gummy fingers and face masks have defeated other biometric technologies.
From https://bredemarket.com/2023/06/12/vision-pro-not-revolutionary-biometrics-event/

A biometrics industry colleague noticed the rhyming words “dummy” and “gummy” and wondered if the latter was a typo. It turns out it wasn’t.

To my knowledge, these gummy fingers do **NOT** have ridges. From https://www.candynation.com/gummy-fingers

Back in 2002, researcher Tsutomu Matsumoto used “gummy bears” gelatin to create a fake finger that fooled a fingerprint reader.

Back in 2002, this news WAS really “scary,” since it suggested that you could access a fingerprint reader-protected site with something that wasn’t a finger. Gelatin. A piece of metal. A photograph.

Except that the fingerprint reader world didn’t stand still after 2002, and the industry developed ways to detect spoofed fingers. Here’s a recent example of presentation attack detection (liveness detection) from TECH5:

TECH5 participated in the 2023 LivDet Non-contact Fingerprint competition to evaluate its latest NN-based fingerprint liveness detection algorithm and has achieved first and second ranks in the “Systems” category for both single- and four-fingerprint liveness detection algorithms respectively. Both submissions achieved the lowest error rates on bonafide (live) fingerprints. TECH5 achieved 100% accuracy in detecting complex spoof types such as Ecoflex, Playdoh, wood glue, and latex with its groundbreaking Neural Network model that is only 1.5MB in size, setting a new industry benchmark for both accuracy and efficiency.
From https://tech5.ai/tech5s-mobile-fingerprint-liveness-detection-technology-ranked-the-most-accurate-in-the-market/

TECH5 excelled in detecting fake fingers for “non-contact” reading where the fingers don’t even touch a surface such as an optical surface. That’s appreciably harder than detecting fake fingers that touch contact devices.

I should note that LivDet is an independent assessment. As I’ve said before, independent technology assessments provide some guidance on the accuracy and performance of technologies.

So gummy fingers and future threats can be addressed as they arrive.

But at least gummy fingers aren’t racist.

Example 2: Gender shades

In 2017-2018, the Algorithmic Justice League set out to answer this question:

How well do IBM, Microsoft, and Face++ AI services guess the gender of a face?
From http://gendershades.org/. Yes, that’s “http,” not “https.” But I digress.

Let’s stop right there for a moment and address two items before we continue. Trust me; it’s important.

This study evaluated only three algorithms: one from IBM, one from Microsoft, and one from Face++. It did not evaluate the hundreds of other facial recognition algorithms that existed in 2018 when the study was released.
The study focused on gender classification and race classification. Back in those primitive innocent days of 2018, the world assumed that you could look at a person and tell whether the person was male or female, or tell the race of a person. (The phrase “self-identity” had not yet become popular, despite the Rachel Dolezal episode which happened before the Gender Shades study). Most importantly, the study did not address identification of individuals at all.

However, the findings did find something:

While the companies appear to have relatively high accuracy overall, there are notable differences in the error rates between different groups. Let’s explore.

All companies perform better on males than females with an 8.1% – 20.6% difference in error rates.

All companies perform better on lighter subjects as a whole than on darker subjects as a whole with an 11.8% – 19.2% difference in error rates.

When we analyze the results by intersectional subgroups – darker males, darker females, lighter males, lighter females – we see that all companies perform worst on darker females.
From http://gendershades.org/overview.html

What does this mean? It means that if you are using one of these three algorithms solely for the purpose of determining a person’s gender and race, some results are more accurate than others.

Three algorithms do not predict hundreds of algorithms, and classification is not identification. If you’re interested in more information on the differences between classification and identification, see Bredemarket’s November 2021 submission to the Department of Homeland Security. (Excerpt here.)

And all the stories about people such as Robert Williams being wrongfully arrested based upon faulty facial recognition results have nothing to do with Gender Shades. I’ll address this briefly (for once):

In the United States, facial recognition identification results should only be used by the police as an investigative lead, and no one should be arrested solely on the basis of facial recognition. (The city of Detroit stated that Williams’ arrest resulted from “sloppy” detective work.)
If you are using facial recognition for criminal investigations, your people had better have forensic face training. (Then they would know, as Detroit investigators apparently didn’t know, that the quality of surveillance footage is important.)
If you’re going to ban computerized facial recognition (even when only used as an investigative lead, and even when only used by properly trained individuals), consider the alternative of human witness identification. Or witness misidentification. Roeling Adams, Reggie Cole, Jason Kindle, Adam Riojas, Timothy Atkins, Uriah Courtney, Jason Rivera, Vondell Lewis, Guy Miles, Luis Vargas, and Rafael Madrigal can tell you how inaccurate (and racist) human facial recognition can be. See my LinkedIn article “Don’t ban facial recognition.”

Obviously, facial recognition has been the subject of independent assessments, including continuous bias testing by the National Institute of Standards and Technology as part of its Face Recognition Vendor Test (FRVT), specifically within the 1:1 verification testing. And NIST has measured the identification bias of hundreds of algorithms, not just three.

In fact, people that were calling for facial recognition to be banned just a few years ago are now questioning the wisdom of those decisions.

But those days were quaint. Men were men, women were women, and artificial intelligence was science fiction.

The latter has certainly changed.

Example 3: Voice spoofs

Perhaps it’s an exaggeration to say that recent artificial intelligence advances will change the world. Perhaps it isn’t. Personally I’ve been concentrating on whether AI writing can adopt the correct tone of voice, but what if we take the words “tone of voice” literally? Let’s listen to President Richard Nixon:

From https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rkQn-43ixs

Richard Nixon never spoke those words in public, although it’s possible that he may have rehearsed William Safire’s speech, composed in case Apollo 11 had not resulted in one giant leap for mankind. As noted in the video, Nixon’s voice and appearance were spoofed using artificial intelligence to create a “deepfake.”

It’s one thing to alter the historical record. It’s another thing altogether when a fraudster spoofs YOUR voice and takes money out of YOUR bank account. By definition, you will take that personally.

In early 2020, a branch manager of a Japanese company in Hong Kong received a call from a man whose voice he recognized—the director of his parent business. The director had good news: the company was about to make an acquisition, so he needed to authorize some transfers to the tune of $35 million. A lawyer named Martin Zelner had been hired to coordinate the procedures and the branch manager could see in his inbox emails from the director and Zelner, confirming what money needed to move where. The manager, believing everything appeared legitimate, began making the transfers.

What he didn’t know was that he’d been duped as part of an elaborate swindle, one in which fraudsters had used “deep voice” technology to clone the director’s speech…
From https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2021/10/14/huge-bank-fraud-uses-deep-fake-voice-tech-to-steal-millions/?sh=8e8417775591

Now I’ll grant that this is an example of human voice verification, which can be as inaccurate as the previously referenced human witness misidentification. But are computerized systems any better, and can they detect spoofed voices?

Well, in the same way that fingerprint readers worked to overcome gummy bears, voice readers are working to overcome deepfake voices. Here’s what one company, ID R&D, is doing to combat voice spoofing:

IDVoice Verified combines ID R&D’s core voice verification biometric engine, IDVoice, with our passive voice liveness detection, IDLive Voice, to create a high-performance solution for strong authentication, fraud prevention, and anti-spoofing verification.

Anti-spoofing verification technology is a critical component in voice biometric authentication for fraud prevention services. Before determining a match, IDVoice Verified ensures that the voice presented is not a recording.
From https://www.idrnd.ai/idvoice-verified-voice-biometrics-and-anti-spoofing/

This is only the beginning of the war against voice spoofing. Other companies will pioneer new advances that will tell the real voices from the fake ones.

As for independent testing:

ID R&D has participated in multiple ASVspoof tests, and performed well in them.
NIST has long conducted speaker recognition evaluations. Perhaps future tests will be expanded to check for deepfakes, in the same way that the FRVT 1:1 test was expanded to check for bias.

A final thought

Yes, fraudsters can use advanced tools to do bad things.

But the people who battle fraudsters can also use advanced tools to defeat the fraudsters.

Take care of yourself, and each other.

Jerry Springer. By Justin Hoch, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=16673259

Fill Your Company Gap With A Biometric Content Marketing Expert

Companies often have a lot of things they want to do, but don’t have the people to do them. It takes a long time to hire someone, and it even takes time to find a consultant that knows your industry and can do the work.

This affects identity/biometric companies just like it affects other companies. When an identity/biometric company needs a specific type of expertise and needs it NOW, it’s often hard to find the person they need.

If your company needs a biometric content marketing expert (or an identity content marketing expert) NOW, you’ve come to the right place—Bredemarket. Bredemarket has no identity learning curve, no content learning curve, and offers proven results.

Identity/biometric consulting in the 1990s

I remember when I first started working as an identity/biometric consultant, long before Bredemarket was a thing.

By Federal Bureau of Investigation – https://washingtonian.com/2016/11/24/the-fbi-opened-its-crime-lab-here-in-dc-back-in-1932, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=128508441

OK, not quite THAT long ago. I started working in biometrics in the 1990s—NOT the 1940s.

In 1994, the proposals department at Printrak International needed additional writers due to the manager’s maternity leave, and she was so valuable that Printrak needed to bring in TWO consultants to take her place.

At least initially, the other consultant and I couldn’t fill the manager’s shoes.

Both of us could write.
Both of us could spell “AFIS.”
Both of us could spell “RAID.” Not the bug spray, but the storage mechanism that stored all those “huge” fingerprint images.
But on that first night that I was cranking out proposal letters for something called a “Latent Station 2000,” I didn’t really know WHAT I was writing about.

As time went on, the other consultant and I learned much more—so much that the company brought both of us on as full-time employees.

After we were hired full-time, we spent a combined 45+ years at Printrak and its corporate successors in proposals, marketing, and product management positions, contributing to industry knowledge.

Here’s an article that the other consultant, Dorothy Bullard, wrote in 2014.
You’ve probably seen more than enough of the stuff that I’ve written over the years, but here’s an old article that quoted me in 2006 about the Motorola-Oracle relationship.

Which shows that learning how to spell “AFIS” can have long-term benefits.

Printrak’s problem

When Printrak needed biometric proposal writing experts quickly, it found two people who filled the bill. Sort of.

But neither of us knew biometrics before we started consuting at Printrak.

And I had never written a proposal before I started consulting at Printrak. (I had written an RFP. Sort of.)

But frankly, there weren’t a lot of identity/biometric consultants out in the field in the 1990s. There were the 20th century equivalents of Applied Forensic Services LLC, but at the time I don’t think there were any 20th century equivalents of Tandem Technical Writing LLC.

Peter Higgins. From https://www.search.org/biometrics-expert-peter-higgins-to-receive-searchs-highest-practitioner-honor/

The 21st century solution

Unlike the 1990s, identity/biometric firms that need consulting help have many options. In addition to Applied Forensic Services and Tandem Technical Writing you have…me.

Mike and Laurel can tell you what they can do, and I heartily endorse both of them.

Let me share with you why I call myself a biometric content marketing expert who can help your identity/biometric company get marketing content out now:

No identity learning curve
No content learning curve
Proven results

No identity learning curve

I have worked with finger, face, iris, DNA, and other biometrics, as well as government-issued identity documents and geolocation. If you are interested, you can read my Bredemarket blog posts that mention the following topics:

No content learning curve

Because I’ve produced both external and internal content on identity/biometric topics, I offer the experience to produce your content in a number of formats.

External content: account-based marketing content, articles, blog posts (I am the identity/biometric blog expert), case studies, data sheets, partner comarketing content, presentations, proposals, sales literature sheets, scientific book chapters, smartphone application content (events), social media posts, web page content, and white papers.
Internal content: battlecards, competitive analyses, demonstration scripts (events), email internal newsletters, FAQs, multi-year plans, playbooks, project plans, proposal templates, quality improvement documents, requirements documents, strategic analyses, and website/social media analyses.

Proven results

Read about them here.

Download

So how can you take advantage of my identity/biometric expertise?

If you need day-one help for an identity/biometric content marketing or proposal writing project, consider Bredemarket.

Send me an email at john.bredehoft@bredemarket.com.
Or go to calendly.com/bredemarket to book a meeting with me.
Or go to bredemarket.com/contact/ to use my contact form.

Why do print people capture 14 fingerprint impression blocks? Why not 10? Or 20?

In the course of writing something on another blog, I mentioned the following:

You see, my fingerprint experience was primarily rooted in the traditional 14 (yes, 14) fingerprint impression block livescan capture technology used by law enforcement agencies to submit full sets of tenprints to the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and state and local agencies that submit to the FBI.
From https://jebredcal.wordpress.com/2023/06/12/when-one-type-of-experience-is-not-enough/

I’d be willing to bet that the vast majority of you have ten fingers.

So why do tenprint livescan devices capture 14 fingerprint impression blocks?

Why 14 fingerprint impression blocks are as good as 20 fingers

It’s important to understand that tenprint livescan devices, which only began to emerge in the 1980s, were originally designed as an electronic way to duplicate the traditional inking process in which ink was placed on arrestees’ fingers, and the ink was transferred to a tenprint fingerprint card.

The criminal fingeprint card (and, with some changes, the applicant fingerprint card) looks something like this:

From Certifix, https://store.certifixlivescan.com/products/criminal-fingerprint-record-card

If you look at the lower half of the front of a fingerprint card, you will see 14 fingerprint impression blocks arranged in 3 rows.

The first row is where you place five “rolled” (nail to nail) fingerprints taken from the right hand, starting with the right thumb and ending with the right little finger.
The second row is where you place five rolled fingerprints from the left hand, again starting with the thumb and ending with the little finger.

So now you’ve captured ten fingerprints. But you’re not done. You still have to fill four more impression blocks. Here’s how:

Identification flat impressions are taken simultaneously without rolling. These are referred to as plain, slap, or flat impressions. The individual’s right and left four fingers should be captured first, followed by the two thumbs (4-4-2 method).
From https://le.fbi.gov/science-and-lab/biometrics-and-fingerprints/biometrics/recording-legible-fingerprints

To clarify, on the third row, for the large box in the lower left corner of the card, you “slap” all four fingers of the left hand down at the same time. Then you skip over the the large box on the lower right corner of the card and slap all four fingers of the right hand down at the same time. Finally you slap the two thumbs down at the same time, capturing the left thumb in the small middle left box, and the right thumb in the small middle right box.

Well, at least that’s how you do it on a traditional inked card. On a tenprint livescan device, you roll and slap your fingers on the large platen, without worrying (that much) about staying within the lines.

Why 14 fingerprint impression blocks are better than 20 fingers

So by the time you’re done, you’ve filled 14 fingerprint impression blocks by 13 distinct actions (the two slap thumbs are captured simultaneously), and you’ve effectively captured 20 fingerprints.

Why?

Quality control.

Because since every finger should theoretically be captured twice, the slaps can be compared against the rolls to ensure that the fingerprints were captured in the correct order.

Locations of finger 2 (green) and finger 3 (blue) for rolled and slap prints.

If you capture the rolled and slap prints in the correct order, then the right index finger (finger 2) should appear in the green area on the first row as a rolled print, and in the green area on the third row as a slap print. Similarly, the middle finger (finger 3) should appear in the blue areas.

If the green rolled print is NOT the same as the green slap print, or if the blue rolled print is NOT the same as the blue slap print, then you captured the fingerprints in the wrong order.

In the old pre-livescan days of inking, a trained tenprint fingerprint examiner (or someone who pretended to be one) had to look at the prints to ensure that the fingers were captured properly. Now the roll to slap comparisons are all done in software, either at the tenprint livescan device itself, or at the automated fingerprint identification system (AFIS) or the automated biometric identification system (ABIS) that receives the prints.

For a mention of companions to roll-to-slap comparison, as well as a number of other issues regarding fingerprint capture quality, see this 2006 presentation given by Behnam Bavarian, then a Vice President at Motorola.

Slide 4 from https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/2016/12/06/bavarianimagequalitypresnistworkshop08march06.pdf

In the 4-4-2 method, groups of prints are captured together, rather than individually. While it is possible to completely mess things up by capturing the left slaps when you are supposed to capture the right slaps, or by twisting your hands in a bizarre manner to capture the thumbs in reverse order, 4-4-2 gives you a reasonable assurance that the slap prints are captured in the correct order, ensuring a proper roll-to-slap comparison.

Well, unless the fingerprints are captured in an unattended fashion, or the police officer capturing the fingerprints is crooked.

But today’s ABIS systems are powerful enough to compare all ten submitted fingers against all ten fingers of every record in an ABIS database, so even if the submitted fingerprints falsely record finger 2 as finger 3, the ABIS will still find the matching print anyway.

Book ’em, Danno.

Why Apple Vision Pro Is a Technological Biometric Advance, but Not a Revolutionary Biometric Event

(Part of the biometric product marketing expert series)

(UPDATE JUNE 24: CORRECTED THE YEAR THAT COVID BEGAN.)

I haven’t said anything publicly about Apple Vision Pro, so it’s time for me to be “how do you do fellow kids” trendy and jump on the bandwagon.

Actually…

It ISN’T time for me to jump on the Apple Vision Pro bandwagon, because while Apple Vision Pro affects the biometric industry, it’s not a REVOLUTIONARY biometric event.

The four revolutionary biometric events in the 21st century

How do I define a “revolutionary biometric event”?

By Alberto Korda – Museo Che Guevara, Havana Cuba, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=6816940

I define it as something that completely transforms the biometric industry.

When I mention three of the four revolutionary biometric events in the 21st century, you will understand what I mean.

9/11. After 9/11, orders of biometric devices skyrocketed, and biometrics were incorporated into identity documents such as passports and driver’s licenses. Who knows, maybe someday we’ll actually implement REAL ID in the United States. The latest extension of the REAL ID enforcement date moved it out to May 7, 2025. (Subject to change, of course.)
The Boston Marathon bombings, April 2013. After the bombings, the FBI was challenged in managing and analyzing countless hours of video evidence. Companies such as IDEMIA National Security Solutions, MorphoTrak, Motorola, Paravision, Rank One Computing, and many others have tirelessly worked to address this challenge, while ensuring that facial recognition results accurately identify perpetrators while protecting the privacy of others in the video feeds.
COVID-19, spring 2020 and beyond. COVID accelerated changes that were already taking place in the biometric industry. COVID prioritized mobile, remote, and contactless interactions and forced businesses to address issues that were not as critical previously, such as liveness detection.

These three are cataclysmic world events that had a profound impact on biometrics. The fourth one, which occurred after the Boston Marathon bombings but before COVID, was…an introduction of a product feature.

From Apple, https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201371

Touch ID, September 2013. When Apple introduced the iPhone 5s, it also introduced a new way to log in to the device. Rather than entering a passcode, iPhone 5S users could just use their finger to log in. The technical accomplishment was dwarfed by the legitimacy that this brought to using fingerprints for identification. Before 2013, attempts to implement fingerprint verification for benefits recipients were resisted because fingerprinting was something that criminals did. After September 2013, fingerprinting was something that the cool Apple kids did. The biometric industry changed overnight.

Of course, Apple followed Touch ID with Face ID, with adherents of the competing biometric modalities sparring over which was better. But Face ID wouldn’t have been accepted as widely if Touch ID hadn’t paved the way.

So why hasn’t iris verification taken off?

Iris verification has been around for decades (I remember Iridian before L-1; it’s now part of IDEMIA), but iris verification is nowhere near as popular in the general population as finger and face verification. There are two reasons for this:

Compared to other biometrics, irises are hard to capture. To capture a fingerprint, you can lay your finger on a capture device, or “slap” your four fingers on a capture device, or even “wave” your fingers across a capture device. Faces are even easier to capture; while older face capture systems required you to stand close to the camera, modern face devices can capture your face as you are walking by the camera, or even if you are some distance from the camera.
Compared to other biometrics, irises are expensive to capture. Many years ago, my then-employer developed a technological marvel, an iris capture device that could accurately capture irises for people of any height. Unfortunately, the technological marvel cost thousands upon thousands of dollars, and no customers were going to use it when they could acquire fingerprint and face capture devices that were much less costly.

So while people rushed to implement finger and face capture on phones and other devices, iris capture was reserved for narrow verticals that required iris accuracy.

With one exception. Samsung incorporated Princeton Identity technology into its Samsung Galaxy S8 in 2017. But the iris security was breached by a “dummy eye” just a month later, in the same way that gummy fingers and face masks have defeated other biometric technologies. (This is why liveness detection is so important.) While Samsung continues to sell iris verification today, it hadn’t been adopted by Apple and therefore wasn’t cool.

Until now.

About the Apple Vision Pro and Optic ID

From Apple, https://www.apple.com/apple-vision-pro/

The Apple Vision Pro is not the first headset that was ever created, but the iPhone wasn’t the first smartphone either. And coming late to the game doesn’t matter. Apple’s visibility among trendsetters ensures that when Apple releases something, people take notice.

And when all of us heard about Vision Pro, one of the things that Apple shared about it was its verification technique. Not Touch ID or Face ID, but Optic ID. (I like naming consistency.)

From Apple, https://www.apple.com/105/media/us/apple-vision-pro/2023/7e268c13-eb22-493d-a860-f0637bacb569/anim/drawer-privacy-optic-id/large.mp4

According to Apple, Optic ID works by analyzing a user’s iris through LED light exposure and then comparing it with an enrolled Optic ID stored on the device’s Secure Enclave….Optic ID will be used for everything from unlocking Vision Pro to using Apple Pay in your own headspace.
From The Verge, https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/5/23750147/apple-optic-id-vision-pro-iris-biometrics

So why did Apple incorporate Optic ID on this device and not the others?

There are multiple reasons, but one key reason is that the Vision Pro retails for US$3,499, which makes it easier for Apple to justify the cost of the iris components.

But the high price of the Vision Pro comes at…a price

However, that high price is also the reason why the Vision Pro is not going to revolutionize the biometric industry. CNET admitted that the Vision Pro is a niche item:

At $3,499, Apple’s Vision Pro costs more than three weeks worth of pay for the average American, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. It’s also significantly more expensive than rival devices like the upcoming $500 Meta Quest 3, $550 Sony PlayStation VR 2 and even the $1,000 Meta Quest Pro.
From CNET, https://www.cnet.com/tech/computing/why-apple-vision-pros-3500-price-makes-more-sense-than-you-think/

Now CNET did go on to say the following:

With Vision Pro, Apple is trying to establish what it believes will be the next major evolution of the personal computer. That’s a bigger goal than selling millions of units on launch day, and a shift like that doesn’t happen overnight, no matter what the price is. The version of Vision Pro that Apple launches next year likely isn’t the one that most people will buy.
From CNET, https://www.cnet.com/tech/computing/why-apple-vision-pros-3500-price-makes-more-sense-than-you-think/

Certainly Vision Pro and Optic ID have the potential to revolutionize the computing industry…in the long term. And as that happens, the use of iris biometrics will become more popular with the general public…in the long term.

But not today. You’ll have to wait a little longer for the next biometric revolution. And hopefully it won’t be a catastrophic event like three of the previous revolutions.

How Can Your Identity Business Create the RIGHT Written Content?

Does your identity business provide biometric or non-biometric products and services that use finger, face, iris, DNA, voice, government documents, geolocation, or other factors or modalities?

Does your identity business need written content, such as blog posts (from the identity/biometric blog expert), case studies, data sheets, proposal text, social media posts, or white papers?

How can your identity business (with the help of an identity content marketing expert) create the right written content?

For the answer, click here.

Using “Multispectral” and “Liveness” in the Same Sentence

(Part of the biometric product marketing expert series)

Now that I’m plunging back into the fingerprint world, I’m thinking about all the different types of fingerprint readers.

The optical fingerprint and palm print readers are still around.
And the capacitive fingerprint readers still, um, persist.
And of course you have the contactless fingerprint readers such as MorphoWave, one that I know about.
And then you have the multispectral fingerprint readers.

What is multispectral?

Bayometric offers a web page that covers some of these fingerprint reader types, and points out the drawbacks of some of the readers they discuss.

Latent prints are usually produced by sweat, skin debris or other sebaceous excretions that cover up the palmar surface of the fingertips. If a latent print is on the glass platen of the optical sensor and light is directed on it, this print can fool the optical scanner….

Capacitive sensors can be spoofed by using gelatin based soft artificial fingers.
From https://www.bayometric.com/fingerprint-reader-technology-comparison/

There is another weakness of these types of readers. Some professions damage and wear away a person’s fingerprint ridges. Examples of professions whose practitioners exhibit worn ridges include construction workers and biometric content marketing experts (who, at least in the old days, handled a lot of paper).

The solution is to design a fingerprint reader that not only examines the surface of the finger, but goes deeper.

From HID Global, “A Guide to MSI Technology: How It Works,” https://blog.hidglobal.com/2022/10/guide-msi-technology-how-it-works

The specialty of multispectral sensors is that it can capture the features of the tissue that lie below the skin surface as well as the usual features on the finger surface. The features under the skin surface are able to provide a second representation of the pattern on the fingerprint surface.
From https://www.bayometric.com/fingerprint-reader-technology-comparison/

From https://www.crunchbase.com/funding_round/lumidigm-series-b–66e3e8f5

Multispectral sensors are nothing new. When I worked for Motorola, Motorola Ventures had invested in a company called Lumidigm that produced multispectral fingerprint sensors; they were much more expensive than your typical optical or capacitive sensor, but were much more effective in capturing true fingerprints to the subdermal level.

From https://newsroom.hidglobal.com/hid-global-acquires-biometric-leader-lumidigm-enhances-authentication-portfolio

Lumidigm was eventually acquired in 2014: not by Motorola (who sold off its biometric assets such as Printrak and Symbol), but by HID Global. This company continues to produce Lumidigm-branded multispectral fingerprint sensors to this day.

But let’s take a look at the other word I bandied about.

What is liveness?

KISS, Alive! By Obtained from allmusic.com., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=2194847

“Gelatin based soft artificial fingers” aren’t the only way to fool a biometric sensor, whether you’re talking about a fingerprint sensor or some other sensor such as a face sensor.

Regardless of the biometric modality, the intent is the same; instead of capturing a true biometric from a person, the biometric sensor is fooled into capturing a fake biometric: an artificial finger, a face with a mask on it, or a face on a video screen (rather than a face of a live person).

This tomfoolery is called a “presentation attack” (becuase you’re attacking security with a fake presentation).

From https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso-iec:30107:-3:ed-2:v1:en

But the standards folks have developed ISO/IEC 30107-3:2023, Information technology — Biometric presentation attack detection — Part 3: Testing and reporting.

From https://www.ibeta.com/iso-30107-3-presentation-attack-detection-confirmation-letters/. Bookmark it. I did.

And an organization called iBeta is one of the testing facilities authorized to test in accordance with the standard and to determine whether a biometric reader can detect the “liveness” of a biometric sample.

(Friends, I’m not going to get into passive liveness and active liveness. That’s best saved for another day.)

[UPDATE 4/24/2024: I FINALLY ADDRESSED THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ACTIVE AND PASSIVE LIVENESS HERE.]

Multispectral liveness

While multispectral fingerprint readers aren’t the only fingerprint readers, or the only biometric readers, that iBeta has tested for liveness, the HID Global Lumidigm readers conform to Level 2 (the higher level) of iBeta testing.

There’s a confirmation letter and everything.

Click to access 210211-HIDGlobal-V-Series-PAD-Level-2-Confirmation-Letter.pdf

From the iBeta website.

This letter was issued in 2021. For some odd reason, HID Global decided to publicize this in 2023.

Oh well. It’s good to occasionally remind people of stuff.

Updates, updates, updates…

When keeping your websites updated, I advise you to do as I say, not as I do. Two of my websites were significantly out of date and needed hurried corrections.

I realized this morning that the “My Experience” page on my jebredcal website was roughly a year out of date, so I hurriedly added content to it. Now the page will turn up in searches for the acronym “ABM” (OK, maybe not on the first page of the search results).

Then I had to return to this website to make some hurried updates, since my April 2022 prohibition on taking certain types of work is no longer in effect as of June 2023. Hence, my home page, my “What I Do” page, and (obviously) my identity page are all corrected.

Oh yeah, I updated my Calendly availability hours also. Which is good, because I already have two meetings booked this week.

Which reminds me…if you need Bredemarket’s services:

Send me an email at john.bredehoft@bredemarket.com.
Or go to calendly.com/bredemarket to book a meeting with me.
Or go to bredemarket.com/contact/ to use my contact form.

My…Umm..Opportunity is YOUR Opportunity

A little over a year ago, Bredemarket announced two changes in my business scope and business hours. I stopped accepting work from clients who marketed systems to identify individuals, and I reduced my business hours to Saturday mornings only.

I had to change my business scope and business hours. On May 9, 2022, I started a full-time position with a company in the identity industry, which meant that I couldn’t consult on weekdays and couldn’t consult on identity projects.

But things change.

As of May 31, 2023, I will no longer be employed at my day job.

Which is my misfortune…um…opportunity.

Has Bredemarket changed its business scope and business hours a second time?

Yes.

As of June 1, 2023:

If you need a consultant for marketing or proposal work, and your company is involved in the identification of individuals, Bredemarket can accept the work.
If you need a consultant who can meet with you during normal business hours, Bredemarket can accept the work.

So what?

My…um…opportunity is your opportunity.

Now that I can expand my business scope and business hours again, you can take advantage of my extensive marketing expertise, including deep experience in the identity industry.

This means you can obtain quickly-generated and expert content with an agreed-upon focus.

This means you can get content that increases your revenue.

What kind of content?

Blog posts, case studies and testimonials, proposals and proposal text, white papers, and many other types of content.

How about e-books?

Yes I also write e-books.

These two e-books explain (a) how Bredemarket starts a project with you, and (b) how Bredemarket has helped other businesses over the years.

(UPDATE OCTOBER 22, 2023: “SIX QUESTIONS YOUR CONTENT CREATOR SHOULD ASK YOU IS SO 2022. DOWNLOAD THE NEWER “SEVEN QUESTIONS YOUR CONTENT CREATOR SHOULD ASK YOU” HERE.)

How Bredemarket Can Help You Win Business (April 16, 2023)Download

How can I find out more information about Bredemarket?

Contact me.

Send me an email at john.bredehoft@bredemarket.com.
Or go to calendly.com/bredemarket to book a ~~Saturday morning~~ meeting with me at any time.
Or go to bredemarket.com/contact/ to use my contact form.

But wait…what if Bredemarket changes its business hours and business scope a THIRD time?

I very well could change Bredemarket’s business hours/scope again.

Maybe I’ll find a new full-time position in a couple of weeks, and I’ll again have to reduce hours and scope.

Which basically means that you have to ACT QUICKLY to ensure you can reserve my services.

(See “how to create a sense of urgency.”)

Two companies that can provide friction ridge/face marketing and writing services, now that Bredemarket won’t

I recently announced a change in business scope for my DBA Bredemarket. Specifically, Bredemarket will no longer accept client work for solutions that identify individuals using (a) friction ridges (including fingerprints and palm prints) and/or (b) faces.

This impacts some companies that previously did business with me, and can potentially impact other companies that want to do business with me. If you are one of these companies, I am no longer available.

Fingerprint evidence — From https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.500-290e3.pdf (a/k/a “leisure reading for biometric system professionals”).

Since Bredemarket will no longer help you with your friction ridge/face marketing and writing needs, who will? Who has the expertise to help you? I have two suggestions.

Tandem Technical Writing

Do you need someon who is not only an excellent communicator, but also knows the ins and outs of AFIS and ABIS systems? Turn to Tandem Technical Writing LLC.

I first met Laurel Jew back in 1995 when I started consulting with, and then working for, Printrak. In fact, I joined Printrak when Laurel went on maternity leave. (I was one of two people who joined Printrak at that time. As I’ve previously noted, Laurel needed two people to replace her.)

Laurel worked for Printrak and its predecessor De La Rue Printrak for several years in its proposals organization.

Today, her biometric and communication experience is available to you. Tandem Technical Writing provides its clients with “15 years of proposal writing and biometrics technology background with high win %.”

Why does this matter to you? Because Laurel not only understands your biometric business, but also understands how to communicate to your biometric clients. Not many people can do both, so Laurel is a rarity in this industry.

The Tandem Technical Writing website is here.

To schedule a consultation, click here.

Applied Forensic Services

Perhaps your needs are more technical. Maybe you need someone who is a certified forensics professional, and who has also implemented many biometric systems. If that is your need, then you will want to consider Applied Forensic Services LLC.

I met Mike French in 2009 when Safran acquired Motorola’s biometric business and merged it into its U.S. subsidiary Sagem Morpho, creating MorphoTrak (“Morpho” + “Printrak”). I worked with him at MorphoTrak and IDEMIA until 2020.

Unlike me, Mike is a true forensic professional. (See his LinkedIn profile.) Back in 1994, when I was still learning to spell AFIS, Mike joined the latent print unit at the King County (Washington) Sheriff’s Office, where he spent over a decade before joining Sagem Morpho. He is an IAI-certified Latent Print Examiner, an IEEE-certified Biometric Professional, and an active participant in IAI and other forensic activities. I’ve previously referenced his advice on why agencies should conduct their own AFIS benchmarks.

Why does this matter to you? Because Mike’s consultancy, Applied Forensic Services, can provide expert advice on biometric procurements and implementation, ensuring that you get the biometric system that addresses your needs.

Applied Forensic Services offers the following consulting services:

The Applied Forensic Services website is here.

To schedule a consultation, click here.

Yes, there are others

There are other companies that can help you with friction ridge and face marketing, writing, and consultation services.

I specifically mention these two because I have worked with their principals both as an employee during my Printrak-to-IDEMIA years, and as a sole proprietor during my Bredemarket years. Laurel and Mike are both knowledgeable, dedicated, and can add value to your firm or agency.

And, unlike some experienced friction ridge and face experts, Laurel and Mike are still working and have not retired. (“Where have you gone, Peter Higgins…”)

Bredemarket announcement: change in business scope

Effective immediately:

Bredemarket does not accept client work for solutions that identify individuals using (a) friction ridges (including fingerprints and palm prints) and/or (b) faces.
Bredemarket does not accept client work for solutions that identify individuals using secure documents, such as driver’s licenses or passports.