Identity cards+Passports Biometric

df001i6876

Biometric cards+ Passports.
Will not be Forgeable.That is what they are telling every one.

With in 3 years the scheme>Is about too start by the MPs this Autumn if the bill is pass
I wish too know if Biometric can tell the differences between the liveing +the dead.
Your eye { iris] +face+ finger print .

tribble

Fingerprints - Doesn't matter if the person is alive or dead, all you need is the fingers.
However, some of the newer devices measure temperature too.Just make sure you keep the fingers in a warm place before you place them on the glass.
You can use gum overlays for a more professional job.

Face Recognition - Dodgy at best and can be fooled with latex and implants.

Retinal/Iris scans - Hard to beat.

Moriarty

'Dead' fingers don't leave latent prints afair, due to there being no oils on the finger after a few hours. That wont affect biometric technology I'd guess though, since I presume they take an 'active' print.

Biometrics are like any other form of security, there are benefits and drawbacks. No single security technique is ever completely secure (well, until properly implemented quantum crytography arrives I guess ), the main security lies in how the technique is implemented.

MrPudding

How can having bio-metric info on a passport prove who someone is? All it proves is the the fingerprint stored on the passport is that of the person presenting it. For those that know how to do it getting a false passport is easy. How does this make it any more difficult? I am not talking about a forged passport, but a genuine passport obtained through fraudulent means.

MrP

Moriarty

It doesn't make it more difficult, it's just a logical step for ID's of various forms to take.

MrPudding

Yes but why? What is the advantage? What do you gain for the enormous cost?

MrP

Imposter

In a lot of cases the illusion of security is the security.

MrPudding

The illusion of security doesn't really cut it for me in this case. This "project" is going to cost a lot of money and is going to do jack sh1t. People here whine about Luas and it's cost, at least at the end of that project there is going to be a tram system. You may think it is too expensive or a complete waste of money byt at least there is a tangible result. Biometric info on a passport does absolutly nothing. Nada. And it will cost huge sums of money.

Seriously who comes up with these ideas. A lot of people think Dubya Bush is simply a puppet. Well some of the ideas he comes out with are so stupid I think they must actually he his idea because the chance of there being 2 people in the Whitehouse as stupid as him is pretty slim.

MrP

Silent Bob

Originally posted by df001i6876
I wish too know if Biometric can tell the differences between the liveing +the dead.
Your eye { iris] +face+ finger print .

Not so sure about Iris scans, but retinal scans don't work on `dead' eyes.

Moriarty

MrPudding, the idea is that even if somone fakes their name, they'll still have their prints/iris scan/whatever correct on the passport. Those can be tracked and will be in databases. It basically enhances the function that passports were originally designed for - to reliably identify people. That isn't possible with current IDs/passports.

Imposter

Originally posted by Moriarty
MrPudding, the idea is that even if somone fakes their name, they'll still have their prints/iris scan/whatever correct on the passport. Those can be tracked and will be in databases. It basically enhances the function that passports were originally designed for - to reliably identify people. That isn't possible with current IDs/passports.

It's more accurate than the current passports but it's still not foolproof. Any security is only as strong as it's weakest link and as is the case here, usually it's humans who are that weak link.

m4cker

the majority of passports that are not legit. in this country are doctered. rather than obtained by identity theft therefore the intrduction of bio-metric passports will eradicate this. part of the thinking elsewhere is that this forgeery is part of organised crime syndicates' by preventing forgery they are eradicating income for these people

MrPudding

I admit that having biometric data may, and I stress the may, prevent forgery but it will not prevent false passports. Tracking people by fingerprint and trusting a passport based on a fingerprint only works if a few conditions are met.

1. The person has had there fingerprint taken in the first place. What I mean here is that previous to them applying for a passport they have had their fingerprint taken and their identity confirmed and tied to that print at that time.
2. Connected to the above. The issuing agency has access to the database where the above information is stored.
3. Connected to the above. When someone applies for a passport they have to have their fingerprint taken. This print will then have to be compared to every other print in every fingerprint database or a master database if one exists not to confirm that they are who they say they are but to confirm that they are not who they do not say they are.
4. The issuing agency has to be above reproach. Will you trust biometric passports issued in 3rd world countries that are rife with government corruption. And yes I do see the irony in this comment given the government we have.
5. Every time someone presents their passport at passport control the fingerprint will have to be compared against every other fingerprint in all the countries fingerprint databases or a master database. Otherwise how can we be sure that this is the same person, he could easily have multiple passports and biometric data will not prevent this from happening. How long will that take?
6. Every fingerprint take by every country will have to be available in every passport control area that wants to use biometric data. How are we going to do that?

Given this how can you justify the expense? Here is a solution that will do the same at a fraction of the cost. http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0404.html Have a look around there is some interesting stuff. Here is a brief outline.
Each passport or ID document contains a cryptographically signed digital portrait of the holder, signed by the passport issuing authority. When your passport is swiped, your picture comes up on the screen, loaded from the passport, and NOT a central database. The digital signature of the passport photo is also downloaded. A PGP-like signature check is done against the public key of the national passport issuing authority, which is stored on the keyring of the swiping device. If the signature is good, the document is genuine. If the signature is bad, the document is a forgery.
This system would have no requirement for a central database or any rubbish like that and would give the same protection as biometrics at a fraction of the cost.

MrP

MrPudding

Originally posted by Moriarty
MrPudding, the idea is that even if somone fakes their name, they'll still have their prints/iris scan/whatever correct on the passport. Those can be tracked and will be in databases. It basically enhances the function that passports were originally designed for - to reliably identify people. That isn't possible with current IDs/passports.

I know I have posted a long post but I want to ask you a question separately in relation to the above. Do you have any idea of what is involved in the above? Even if we had biometric data stored on passports it would still not be possible. Oh and also passport do not nesseccarily reliably identify people.

MrP

Moriarty

I'm not an out-and-out advocate of biometrics. Frankly I don't care too much either way. I don't know the details of how they're being implemented for passports exactly, so I can't tell you if I think its worth the cost or not. I simply think that biometrics is a useful technology that has some worthwhile benefits to offer.

I have a fair idea of what would be involved in tracking large amounts of biometric data in real time or near real time (which, technically, I wasn't talking about earlier in any case). It's not inconsiderable. On the other hand, just because something takes some effort and money doesn't mean it's not worth doing.

MrPudding

Originally posted by Moriarty
I have a fair idea of what would be involved in tracking large amounts of biometric data in real time or near real time (which, technically, I wasn't talking about earlier in any case). It's not inconsiderable. On the other hand, just because something takes some effort and money doesn't mean it's not worth doing.

Can you actually give me a reason as to why it is worth doing? That is my point you see. It's not worth it.

MrP

df001i6876

Body parts can be kepted a live for transplants
the head can be kept a live.
the tricky part is putting it back on the body it came from.
Hand ]+finger print
DNA ]+ mouth the head}+Iris
?
frightening= technology

oscarBravo

What?