1984 ???

, , - .
" . "

At the moment, the spread of biometric identification systems can only be called hysteria. Under the slogan of “combating terrorism”, we are forced into the need for biometric passporting. Let's not leave this fact without our attention and analyze the situation. To begin with, let's look at the most common biometric systems.

Usually they are divided into two classes - static and dynamic . The first are purely physiological, i.e. acquired at birth, and, as a rule, for life (although to be precise, some of them change anyway). The second is acquired, which are subject to constant change. If we specify the classification, then by the type of input data the system can be divided into two classes: universal and real-time . The former can work either without direct contact with the object (at least residual traces of the object are necessary for the passage of the identification procedure) and in contact with the object. The second work only directly in contact with the identifying object (it is difficult to leave your eyes for examination :). And according to the type of hardware, the system can also be divided into two classes: cybernetic systems and expert-hardware systems. Their main difference lies in the fact that the former are built “in the image and likeness” of a person, and the latter use parameters that are inaccessible to a person without the use of special tools to perform their functions.

In principle, all this division is rather arbitrary, and in my opinion, some systems can not be attributed to only one class.
')
All systems can be described by a single work algorithm, let's call it a comparative algorithm . It looks like this.


Differences appear in the input data processing methods, as well as in the data itself and the degree of their uniqueness and reliability.

The most common biometric systems

• Dactyloscopy. The method is based on the uniqueness of papillary patterns on the fingers. Conditionally it can be divided into two types: hardware identification and expert analysis .
  Hardware identification. It is currently used in a wide area from access to flash memory to restricting access to secure rooms. The algorithm corresponds to the above.
  Expert analysis . It takes place mainly when conducting forensic examinations. Simplified work algorithm. An imprint (imprints), reliably belonging to a certain person, is compared with an imprint related to an event. Points of similarity are identified, and if the number of these points is significant, a positive conclusion is made. The logic here is simple. There are two sets of prints, one of which belongs to the person, and the second is related to the event. If the sets coincide, it is quite likely that the person is related to the event. It should be noted that all the work is done by a forensic expert (in this connection, we can talk about a certain degree of subjectivity), and almost always the imprints related to the events are residual.
• Scanning of the iris. The method is based on the uniqueness of the “pattern” of the iris of the eye. Some features are that identification occurs remotely, without physical contact with the scanner. The functions of the scanner can be performed by a portable camera with sufficient resolution if there is specialized software, which in fact performs comparative functions.
• Retinal scan. The method is based on the unique pattern of the grid of blood vessels on the back of the eye. The comparison algorithm is the same as in the above methods. Scanning is performed by infrared radiation of low intensity, directed through the pupil to the back of the eye. Specialized and rather expensive cameras are already used here.
• Hand geometry analysis. With the help of a special device, a three-dimensional image of the brush is built, which is converted into code. The identification process is similar to the above.
• Face geometry analysis. The method was born in the bosom of cybernetics (as the transfer of human abilities to a machine platform, in this case, the process of our recognition of each other). Based on the photograph, a three-dimensional image of the face is constructed, which is converted into a code. The identification process is similar to the above. I think that a big disadvantage of this method is that the equipment dealers consider the system’s advantage, namely the possibility (to be exact, no possibility, but the real need) of training the system, supposedly “intellectuality” . To work optimally at the entrance of the system, you need to submit a dozen (and maybe even more :) different images with different hairstyles, hair color, with or without facial hair, otherwise one day you will be denied access, what is not good.
• Voice identification. This method evaluates immediately the totality of voice parameters. Feature - convenience and the greatest distance, but the disadvantage is the unreliability of the method (no one is immune from colds, laryngitis, or something else like that).
• Signature analysis. Not to be confused with "digital" . This is where the usual signature is meant. The oldest method, albeit in a new hardware wrapper. Devices for removing input data are special pens or tablets, and there are also combinations of them. The reliability of the method is not very impressive. Signatures forge is not the first century.
• DNA analysis. Perhaps the most powerful means of identification at the moment. The main feature is the complexity of the processing of input data, the high cost of both equipment and expertise, as well as the lowest probability of error.

There are other methods of identification, all interested in questions to someone Google .

About errors.

" ..."
, " "

In the mind of a person who does not bother with excessive thoughts, the fact of the reliability of biometric data does not even emerge. From viewing thousands (if not millions) of films in which biometrics are involved, he formed the opinion that biometrics cannot be falsified and the reliability of identification is in percentage terms equal to 100%. But this is far from the case. The percentage of errors occur in all of the above methods, somewhere more, somewhere less, but it can be said with confidence that the percentage of errors in the most common methods of identification is excessively high. Although criminological officials say they are 100% effective in the same fingerprinting, it is possible to dissuade anyone from this statement with the simplest logical conclusion. If dactyloscopy gives 100% or close to it the probability of correct identification, then what the hell is asked is the unmeasured amount of funds was spent (and spent) to develop and implement other biometric systems? Why this redundancy? Not logical But from here, even without complicated procedures for calculating scientific reliability criteria, the fact of the unreliability of fingerprinting follows.

Such things can be said about any method, since none of them gives a 100% guarantee that you will not be accused of a crime that is not committed or that someone will not have access to this protected biometrics.

Details about the errors of fingerprinting and DNA analysis are read in the computer .

1984?

" . , , , ..."
, "1984"

States seek universal control over their filed, despite the notorious rights and freedoms. And today's biometric hysteria gives plenty of food for thought. In a country that considers itself a stronghold of civil liberties, satellite monitoring of a part of the population and the removal of biometric data entering the country has been practiced for a long time. Regardless of the social system declared by countries, they in fact seek to have the fullest possible information about their (and others' too) information, be it personal data or biometrics . It always has been, and always will be. We can only know about it and be very careful about it, because it is good to be Joe , who is elusive , who therefore cannot be caught because no one needs a fig.

There is another interesting nuance, the biometric database is still the same "1" and "0" , which means that there is a possibility of their leakage. Where and how these stolen data will be difficult to say, but the fact that the state and criminal structures will somehow be able to use this data leads me to disturbing thoughts.

Maybe I'm paranoid, and you?

PS For all readers, I do not pretend to the completeness of the list of biometric systems I compiled.