Report - Guardian

172 The LSE Identity Project Report: June 2005Similarly, QinetiQ advised the Government on the challenges of perfectingauthentication, and re-emphasised usability and user acceptance as a factor.“Fingerprints have been in existence for many years and fitted theanalogue authentication processes well. In today's digital domainfingerprints suffer from high false acceptance rates and a social stigmain some cultures, notably UK (“only criminals have their fingerprintstaken, don't they?”). A biometric has to have high fidelity and be leastintrusive to the individual. It must also be low cost and impact on theexisting infrastructure as little as possible. Any society that adopts abiometric for authentication must also allow for technologyimprovement.(…) Its fidelity must be such that the probability of a correctauthentication is what is known as the five 9s—99.999% probability.This figure is taken from telecommunication availability statistics forthe domestic customer before they complain about lack of service.The science and research into biometrics is only really beginning andsystems that adopt authentication biometrics must accommodate thefuture.” 429The advice provided to the Government was that there are many components to thedecision to implement biometrics. A belief in the technology working, or that it can bemade to work is dangerously simplistic. Rather it is essential to understand thedynamics of the technology, the specific details of its effectiveness, the challenges todeployment, and its usability, amongst many other dynamics.The Government has conducted a number of studies on the use of biometrics to betterunderstand some of these dynamics, though the results have been conflicting. The firstwas commissioned by Communications Electronics Security Group (CESG), andconducted by researchers at the Centre for Mathematics and Scientific Computing at theNational Physical Laboratory. 430 This research was conducted well before theGovernment articulated its plans for a national ID system based on biometrics. It studieda number of systems (face, finger, hand, iris, vein and voice-biometrics) to testperformance, feasibility, and to encourage more testing.This first NPL report was careful to note that system performance is dependent on theapplication, environment and population. This study involved only 200 users. The studylooked at the metrics that show the usefulness of each biometric system.- Often more than two attempts would be required to obtain an enrolment;- There are frequent errors in data collection, e.g. the use of the wrong biometric,user interaction problems, and input errors;- The ‘failure to enrol rate’ measures the mere generation of a template of value tothe system. Face, Hand, Vein, and Voice achieved a 0% failure rate, irisachieved a 0.5% failure rate, and fingerprinting varied from 1% to 2%;429 ‘Memorandum submitted by QinetiQ’.430 ‘Biometric Product Testing Final Report’, Issue 1.0, Tony Mansfield, Gavin Kelly, David Chandler, Jan Kane,March 19, 2001.