Denial of Access in Biometrics-Based Authentication Systems
Biometrics has been widely recognised as a powerful tool for problems requiring personal identification. Unlike traditional authentication methods, however, biometrics-based authentication systems may reject valid users or accept impostors. The accuracy of a biometric system could be defined as its combined ability to reject impostors and accept valid users. The biometrics industry places heavy emphasis on security issues relating to the rejection of impostors while denial of access remains largely neglected in the evaluation of biometric systems. In this paper, we discuss how denial of access may impact on all major aspects of a biometric system and propose solutions to reduce the probability of denial of access based on more sophisticated authentication decision-making strategies.
KeywordsAuthentication System Biometric Data Biometric System Tolerance Threshold False Acceptance Rate
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.J. L. Wayman, “Technical testing and evaluation of biometric identification devices”, in Biometrics: Personal Identification in Networked Society, A. Jain, R. Bolle, and S. Pankati (editors), Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 345–368, 1999.Google Scholar
- 3.R. M. Bolle, S. Pankanti, and N. K. Ratha, “Evaluating techniques for biometrics-based authentication systems (FRR)”, in Proceedings 15th IAPRInt. Conference on Pattern Recognition, vol. II, pp. 835–841 Barcelona, Spain, Sep. 2000.Google Scholar
- 4.J. G. Daugman and G. O. Williams, “A proposed standard for biometric decidability”, in Proceedings CardTech/SecureTech Conference, Atlanta, GA, pp. 223–234, 1996.Google Scholar
- 5.United Kingdom Biometric Working Group, “Best practices in testing and reporting device performance”, version 1.0, Mar. 2000.Google Scholar
- 6.S. Nanavati, M. Thieme, and R. Nanavati, “Biometrics: Identity Verification in a Networked World”. John Wiley and Sons, 2002.Google Scholar
- 7.ISO/DIS 21352: 2001, Biometric information management and security, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 27 N2949.Google Scholar
- 8.A. K. Jain, R. Bolle, and S. Pankanti, “Introduction to biometrics”, in Biometrics: Personal Identification in Networked Society, A. Jain, R. Bolle, and S. Pankati (editors), Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 1–41, 1999.Google Scholar
- 9.L. Hong, A. K. Jain, and S. Pankanti, “Can multibiometrics improve performance?”, in Proceedings AutoID’99, Summit, NJ, pp. 59–64, Oct. 1999.Google Scholar
- 10.A. Ross, A. K. Jain, and J. Z. Qian, “Information fusion in biometrics”, in Proceedings 3rd International Conference on Audio-and Video-Based Person Authentication, pp. 354–359, Sweden, Jun. 2001.Google Scholar
- 11.N. Poh and J. Korczak, “Hybrid biometric person authentication using face and voice features”, in Proceedings 3rd International Conference on Audio-and Video-Based Person Authentication, pp. 354–359, Sweden, Jun. 2001.Google Scholar
- 12.J. G. Daugman, “Biometric Decision Landscape”, Technical Report No. TR482, University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory, 1999.Google Scholar
- 14.A. K. Jain and A. Ross, “Learning user-specific parameters in multibiometric system”, in Proc. International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), Rochester, New York, Sep. 2002.Google Scholar