Report - Guardian

More documents

Recommendations

Info

178 The LSE Identity Project Report: June 2005may be larger than the outlier population. Not all blind and visually impaired peoplewill be unable to use iris recognition technology. Indeed it is quite possible that mostpeople will interface with iris recognition, though perhaps with varying degrees ofdifficulty. Such situations will be covered elsewhere in this report.Research findings and medical literature indicate significant potential problems forblind and visually impaired people when using iris recognition systems.A 2002 technology assessment report by the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO)highlighted a number of problems with the accuracy of iris recognition. 438 Whileacknowledging that the mathematics of the technique appeared sound, the enrolmentand verification elements of iris recognition were far from perfect. The Failure To EnrolRate was around half a percent, while the False Non Match Rate ranged from 1.9 to 6percent. This means that around 1:200 of the research population could not enrol, whilea further 1:18 to 1:50 could not match their enrolled iris.It is unclear how much of this failure was due to the inability of visually impairedpeople to interface with the technology, however the report does acknowledge that iristechnology can be hindered by poor eyesight. It also states that people without glasseshave a lower FNMR than people wearing glasses. Importantly, the report – one of themost substantial yet published – warns:“People with glaucoma or cataracts may not be reliably identified byiris recognition systems.” 439Biometrics researchers – and the industry itself - generally acknowledge the limitationsof iris technology for blind and visually impaired people. A report published in the FBILaw Enforcement Journal observed:“Although the theory requires additional research, some evidencesuggests that patterns in the eye may change over time because ofillness or injury. Therefore, eye identification systems may not workfor blind people or individuals with eye damage.” 440This view is reflected in various studies and reports. One industry report states:“Subjects who are blind or who have cataracts can also pose achallenge to iris recognition as there is difficulty in reading theiris.” 441A report for the European Commission observes:438 U.S. General Accounting Office, Using Biometrics for Border Security, Washington DC, 2002,http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03174.pdf.439 ibid p.73.440 Stephen Coleman, Biometrics: solving cases of mistaken identity and more. Source: FBI Law EnforcementBulletin v.69 no.6 (June 2000), p. 9-16, ISSN: 0014-5688 Number: BSSI00019069,http://www.nesbary.com/class/621w02/articles/coleman.htm.441 Penny Khaw, Iris recognition technology for improved authentication, SANS Institute, 2002http://www.sans.org/rr/papers/6/132.pdf.
The LSE Identity Project Report: June 2005 179“The iris recognition systems had public acceptability problems in thepast because of the use of an infrared beam. The recent systemsregister the iris image at a distance from the user but users are stillsceptical of this technology. Blind people or people with severelydamaged eyes (diabetics) will not be able to use this biometricmethod.” 442A study by the UK National Physical Laboratory reported that:“(iris recognition) tests revealed difficulty in enrolling a blindperson’s iris because the system required both eyes to be enrolled.” 443While the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) acknowledges:“Iris recognition may fail in the case of a blind eye.” 444The biometrics industry appears reluctant to publicly discuss the prevalence of theoutlier problem. However, in an industry presentation, Iridian Technologies has statedthat the outlier population for iris recognition is “less than two per cent”. 445 This mayrepresent up to a million people in the UK.This is a substantially larger outlier population that has been previously acknowledged.In its public statements, industry often cites the incidence of Aniridia, in which a personhas no iris. Studies have shown Anaridia to occur in about 1:60,000 births. Thisprevalence would translate to almost 1,000 UK residents. 446This however is only one of many populations that may be unable to register with an irisrecognition system. One medical report examining iris changes following cataractsurgery concluded:“Cataract procedures are able to change iris texture in such a way thatiris pattern recognition is no longer feasible or the probability of falserejected subjects is increased. Patients who are subjected to intraocularprocedures may be advised to re-enrol in biometric iris systems whichuse this particular algorithm so as to have a new template in thedatabase.” 447442 European Commission, Final Report - Biometric Techniques: Review and Evaluation of Biometric Techniques forIdentification and Authentication Including an Appraisal of the Areas Where They are Most Applicable, April 1997,http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:gbLP6j2f8KMJ:ini.cs.tu-berlin.de/~schoener/sembiometry/polemi97_eu_report_biometrics.doc+%22iris+recognition%22+%22blind+people%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8.443 Tony Mansfield, Gavin Kelly, David Chandler, and Jane Kane, CESG Contract X92A/4009309 Biometric ProductTesting Final Report, Draft 0.6, Middlesex: National Physical Laboratory.444 ETSI EG 202 116 V1.2.1 (2002-09) Design for All, Human Factors (HF) - Guidelines for ICT products andservices, http://docbox.etsi.org/EC_Files/EC_Files/eg_202116v010201p.pdf.445 Industry presentation by Iris Australia & Iridium, http://www.sensory7.com/presentations/DSD.ppt.446 emedicine.com, http://www.emedicine.com/OPH/topic43.htm447 Roberto Roizenblatt et al., Iris recognition as a biometric method after cataract surgery, BioMedical EngineeringOnLine 2004, 3:2.
Page 1:
The Identity Projectan assessment o
Page 5 and 6:
The LSE Identity Project Report: Ju
Page 7:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15:
Page 19:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33:
Page 36 and 37:
22 The LSE Identity Project Report:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
100 The LSE Identity Project Report
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142: The LSE Identity Project Report: Ju
Page 157: The LSE Identity Project Report: Ju
Page 160 and 161: 146 The LSE Identity Project Report
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317:
show all

Report - Guardian

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?