Vendors of biometric devices are betting
that their face- and eye-recognition technologies can make a camera
lens as efficient as a security guard's watchful eye. Far-fetched?
Maybe not.
Just three years ago, facial and iris biometric scanners looked
like James Bond film props but were cumbersome to set up and
functioned poorly without ideal lighting and camera placement. Even
worse, their software often interfered with other applications.
Although problems linger, biometrics has been improving rapidly. It
can't yet replace human judgment, but it can replace the password.
The iris of the human eye develops before birth through a process
called chaotic morphogenesis, and no two irises are the same. Even
identical twins have four distinct irises, which is what makes iris
scanning a sure method of authentication.
The GCN Lab used the $239 Authenticam, made by Panasonic Security
and Digital Imaging Co., to test iris- and facial-recognition
software. The setup was actually two cameras, one atop the other.
The upper camera, originally developed by Iridian Technologies Inc.,
performed iris recognition only. We coupled the second camera,
similar to a standard Webcam, to Visionics Corp. facial-recognition
software.
Iridian's KnoWho iris-recognition software, which costs $25 to $75
per user license, encodes a captured image of the iris for
subsequent matching and verification. The KnoWho version we tested
came with $49.95 SafLink 2000 biometric administration software from
SafLink Corp.
Private ID, a second Iridian app, came bundled with the Panasonic
Authenticam. Private ID captures the iris image for KnoWho. The
Iridian products gave the most effective biometric security among
the products we reviewed. They never misidentified a user and
couldn't be tricked by environmental changes.
The Panasonic Authenticam had three light-emitting diodes at the
bottom that projected safe infrared beams, allowing iris recognition
to proceed at any level of ambient light. In the windowless lab,
even with lights off, we could enroll users on a Pentium 4 PC with
the Iridian software installed.
Our testers found iris verification a little awkward at first, but
once they got used to it, they thought it worked as fast as
fingerprint log-ins.
Iris enrollment took two steps. First, each user placed an eye in
front of the camera lens and watched for a yellow dot to appear.
Next the user moved away to about 18 to 22 inches from the
Authenticam, at which point the yellow dot turned green.
Once that color transformation occurred, the user had to remain
still while the software finished the enrollment.
Private ID and KnoWho worked fairly fast. Once an iris pattern was
captured, enrollment took little more than a second -- one second
slower than most fingerprint readers but hardly a noticeable
difference.
Visionics' FaceIt calculated a digital identity code for each user
by measuring 14 out of 80 possible landmarks -- facial features such
as eyes, lips and nose. Such calculations should be unaffected by
new facial hair or haircuts.
We had problems at first making the lighting consistent enough for
FaceIt. If the camera moved, all the users had to be re-enrolled.
The more often they enrolled, however, the more consistently FaceIt
could identify them.
The software costs up to $30,000 for a three-camera system using
FaceIt Argus, which is for large areas such as airports. A desktop
version bundled with SafLink 2000 costs less than $50 per user.
Facial-recognition technology, unlike iris identification, can be
fooled by similar measurements -- for example, faces of twins have
nearly the same measurements.
AcSys Biometrics Corp. put what it calls holographic/quantum neural
technology into its AcSys Face Recognition System Entry software to
determine a user's most noticeable characteristics.
Unlike Visionics' FaceIt, which looked for facial landmarks,
AcSys's engine compared the entire face in three dimensions against
20,000 images in a database. From the similarities and differences,
it interpreted what made one face different from others.
Accuracy was affected by the environment, just as with the
Visionics software. The lighting for AcSys's product had to be
consistent.
If users re-enrolled under different lighting, FRS Entry could
learn to recognize them in both environments. But that was
time-consuming because the new images had to be transplanted into
the users' profiles.
FRS Entry, unlike FaceIt, recorded a new image each time it
verified a user. All the images went into the user's database
template. A user who, for example, grew long hair would continue to
be recognized.
As with the Visionics software, the more pictures of the user, the
better. The longer we used FRS Entry, the better it got at
distinguishing people who looked somewhat alike.
But once again, if a face could fool a human guard, it could fool
FRS Entry.
In a one-to-many setting for identifying a face in a crowd, FRS
Entry wrongly identified PostNewsweek Tech Media President David
Greene as Editorial Vice President Thomas R. Temin. (PostNewsweek
Tech Media is a unit of The Washington Post Co., which owns this
newspaper.)
Its error was probably caused by an office lighting change. But as
the software gathered more images of both men into its database, it
learned to distinguish them even when Temin wore Greene's glasses.
Although AcSys designed FRS Entry for people to enter secure
locations and not as a log-in tool, the same recognition engine is
available in a stand-alone product.
AcSys FRS Entry requires a high-end camera and a dedicated, fast
PC. The complex pricing structure depends on the number of users,
physical infrastructure and number of doors monitored.
The company gave us a rough estimate of $10,000 per door, or $1,500
per user up to 99 users, not counting installation or hardware.
Facial-recognition technologies are still immature. But once they
better adapt to lighting changes, we believe they stand a good
chance of replacing quite a few security guards.
At the moment, iris scanning is more reliable than facial
recognition, though that could change. Database storage and
processing power requirements for facial recognition probably will
remain higher than for iris scanning as both technologies mature.
To respond, e-mail editor@gcn.com or visit the Government Computer
News Web site at http://www.gcn.com.
Reported By Government Computer News, http://www.gcn.com
10:18 CST
(20020509/WIRES ONLINE, LEGAL, BUSINESS/)