By Nick Heath, 21 February 2008 17:01
NEWS
By 2015, biometric technology will make getting on a plane almost as easy as getting on the Tube or train today, according to a leading border security expert.
silicon.com's A to Z of Biometrics
Click on the links below to find out everything you'll need to know about biometric security.
A is for Accuracy
B is for Behavioural biometric
C is for Cash machine
D is for Database
E is for Ear
F is for Facial recognition
G is for Gummi bears
H is for Hand geometry
I is for Iris
J is for Juan Vucetich
K is for Keystroke dynamics
L is for Liveness testing
M is for Mobile phones
N is for Network security
O is for Oxford
P is for Palm
Q is for Queues
R is for Registration
S is for Signature verification
T is for Twins
U is for Universality
V is for Voice verification
W is for Walk
X is for X-ray
Y is for Young
Z is for Zurich Airport
Automated biometric systems will eventually replace the often laborious system of repeated manual passport and security checks that plague fliers today, said Matthew Finn, director of government and security for airline industry IT body Sita.
In future "trusted" travellers will instead simply pass through an automatic gate that will instantly verify their identity and security risk.
Sita has had general talks with the UK government about future border control systems and has been involved with developing a number of precursors to these technologies, including the miSense biometric security trial at Heathrow Airport.
Current biometric border security projects being rolled out by the UK government include Project Semaphore, Iris and the miSense trial.
Semaphore - which checks UK-bound passenger details against databases of banned individuals and passenger name records to assess risk - and Iris - which lets fliers use automated iris scanning gates at several UK airports - have been used as part of the e-Borders scheme, which will go live next month after a 39-month trial.
Finn said that future security systems will rely on e-passports, ID or smart cards or visas that would contain both biometric data - such as fingerprints and iris scans - and biographical data, ranging from name and address to job and marital status.
Automated gates would first confirm an individual's identity using biometrics before checking their biographic data for any updates in their security/legal/journey status against various databases.
Finn said the improvement of future automated biometric border gates over today's Iris system would be comparable to the leap from VHS to DVD.
He said: "The UK government is absolutely committed to simplifying passenger travel. Today you will stand in lines several times at a place like Heathrow - it really is repetitive checks and all of that can be integrated. By 2015 the majority of people arriving in and departing from the UK will hold an international standardised travel document that contains biometrics."
Finn added: "At that point 99 per cent of people will only face manual checks by exception rather than by rule. It gets to the point where it can almost be carried out as you walk."
The biometric data would be stored on documents or cards, not on a central database, making the information faster to process and reducing the security risk.
Another major advantage is that a single document or card could work with different biometric readers across the world by containing biometrics ranging from fingerprints to iris scans.
A spokesman for the UK government's Border and Immigration Agency said: "We have already tested trusted traveller schemes such as IRIS and we are keen to learn and build on those."
Comments
There are 6 comments. Join the discussion
1. Karen Challinor
by 2015 I predict it will be possible to temporarily assume someone elses biometrics pretty much at will using cosmetic techniques
after all there is a very large incentive for this to be the case access to bank accounts, access to buildings and anonymous travel.
all good motivational reasons for the criminals to spend their ill gotten gains on research
the people developing this kind of tech don't always wear white hats and their budgets are just as big as the good guys
permanently changing your biometrics once yours are in the public domain will however require surgery
this isn't a future I want any part of
2. CM
But what happens if you're blind and have no fingers?
3. Richard
Again the fallacy: That by knowing someone's name you know anything more than... their name:
So, what is actually gained by enabling "trusted" people to pass through an automatic "biometric" gate - even assuming that it actually works?
Rather than introducing ever more stringent, expensive and intrusive surveillance;
Wouldn't it be better to spend a fraction of the money and ingenuity on trying to address the causes of our apparent "insecurity"?
4. Anonymous
This ridiculous fantasy idea was first floated in the USA in the few days immediately following Sept 11 2001.
It is riddled with flaws. The easiest to deal with is the "convenience" argument. The processing time for biometrics is so close to the time a human immigration officer takes that this part of the process is no different. And once significant numbers use the method the queues will be as long and as slow as we see today.
The second is more subtle. So an "non trusted" person applies for this sevice? What do you do? In practice - you let them join. Because the spooks, one hopes, would never be so stupid as to alert somebody to their non-trusted status by refusing. And so it follows that such a service would, very likely, actually log and cross check every person using it against some "database in the sky".
There has been plenty of writing on this subject that points out why such approaches neither improve "security" nor "convenience". Let's have a bit of "Weekly Roundup" mockery applied to this!
5. Neil Norman, CEO, Human Recognition Systems
Responding to Richard's comments, the introduction of biometrics for the purpose of enabling "flying bliss" is actually underpinned by a clear-cut business model. The ascertion that biometric technology is "expensive and overly sophisticated" and that "a fraction of the cost" could be spent on other means simply does not stack up.
As a biometrics integrator on large-scale programmes, we understand that biometric projects require exactly the same business case underpinnings as any other system deployment. If the costs outway the benefits, the project does not get signed off, simple.
Having deployed solutions in the airport environment, this business case development approach is no less relevent. In our favour however is that positive identification is a mandated requirement and currently, the only adequate technology we have is human resource. In light of the specialist security clearance and 24/7/365 requirement of staffing a post, you can begin to understand that the benefit equation is a relatively easy eqation to both understand and in turn meet.
I can categorically say that the deployment of biometrics in the airport environment more than meet the business case. More so, biometric technology introduces a consistent identification performance and contrary to the all too common rhetoric, biometric technology work and performs reliably, hence our customers actively using such systems to support the operation.
6. Karen Challinor
responding to Mr Norman
so basically it's cheaper to use a machine than a person, and all we have to do is surrender our biometrics for the poors sods who have the job now to be made redundant and be redeployed to somewhere that is not your concern but will most likely be the local jobseeker centre
but still, the business case adds up so thats not your problem is it ?
keeping people in employment sounds like an excellent reason not to surrender my biometrics