by clicking on the page. A slider will appear, allowing you to adjust your zoom level. Return to the original size by clicking on the page again.
the page around when zoomed in by dragging it.
the zoom using the slider on the top right.
by clicking on the zoomed-in page.
by entering text in the search field and click on "In This Issue" or "All Issues" to search the current issue or the archive of back issues respectively.
by clicking on thumbnails to select pages, and then press the print button.
this publication and page.
displays a table of sections with thumbnails and descriptions.
displays thumbnails of every page in the issue. Click on a page to jump.
allows you to browse through every available issue.
GCN : June 2013
CYBEREYE BY WILLIAM JACKSON GOVERNMENT HAS LONG been the driving force in the adoption and use of biomet- rics. Law enforcement has used fingerprints for forensic identification for more than a century, and more recently the U.S. government has re- quired biometrics for identify management through smart government ID cards. Internationally, govern- ments around the world are adopting biometric standards for passports and border controls. But a panel of government and industry experts told leg- islators recently that biomet- rics might be poised to take o as a consumer technology. Like so many other recent changes, it could be driven by the evolution and conver- gence of the laptop and smart phone. "Acceptance will be driven by providing added value," said Charles H. Romine, director of the IT Laboratory at the National Institute of Standards and Technology. And where will that added value come? Stephanie Schuckers, director of the Center for Identification Tech- nology Research, a federally funded cooperative research center, is clear about that. "The killer app is the mobile payment system, and the driver is the customer," she said. The convenience of using a smart phone or other mobile device for fast, secure transactions will create a mar- ket for convenient biometric authentication. "As we are better able to make the connection between a device and an individual, that trust will enable confi- dence and support such appli- cations as using our devices for payment at point of sale locations, such as the grocery store," said Schuckers, point- ing out that customers today can walk into a Starbucks and scan their smart phones to pay for their orders. John Mears, a board member of the International Biometrics and Identifica- tion Association trade group, said rumor has it that Apple s new iPhone 5S, which might or might not be released this summer, will come with a fingerprint reader. And if Apple can t build a market for new technology, who can? With an expected capacity of 128G, the new phone could have the ca- pacity to handle biometric templates. These statements were made at a May 21 hearing of the House Science, Space and Technology subcommittees on research and technology. Given the rapid expansion of life online and the inadequacy of the current user-name- and-password paradigm, the legislators wanted to know why biometrics hasn t been adopted more rapidly. There are a number of reasons. For all of its promise, biometrics still is a maturing technology, and although it is practical it is not yet broadly interoperable. And for all of the recent attention paid to online threats, the public is notoriously unwilling to inconvenience itself in the name of better security. These things will change, and maybe soon. But the legislators seemed to be work- ing with the assumption that biometrics is rock-solid secure technology. It isn t. There are weaknesses, trade-o s and concerns, just as with all forms of identity verification. "Biometrics can increase confidence in identification processes," Mears told the panel. "However, not all biometrics provide the same level of assurance and many factors impact e ectiveness." The experts pointed out that for a biometric, such as a fingerprint or a voice analysis, to be e ective it must be unique (or close to it) and persistent. And although agencies have been using biometrics for decades, to date there is precious little research on just how unique and unchanging these features are. This is neces- sary before those accepting biometrics can decide if the features provide the level of certainty they require for a given purpose. And despite the common idea that a biometric is ab- solute, matching has always been on a "close enough," basis. Maybe no one else has your fingerprint, but print-matching applications use only a sampling of data picked up from a reader and stored in a template. How detailed that data is and how closely two scans must match in order to be accepted depends on the level of secu- rity an application requires. More security requires more computing capacity, more expense and possibly more inconvenience. None of this means that biometrics can t be a big improvement over user names and passwords. But once the technology matures organiza- tions still will have to decide what levels of risk they are willing to accept in given situ- ations and what expense --- in terms of money, time and resources --- they are willing to trade for it.• BIOMETRICS: BETTER THAN PASSWORDS, BUT NOT BULLETPROOF 16 GCN JUNE 2013 • GCN.COM Despite the common idea that biometric is absolute, matching has always been on a "close enough" basis.