Campus ID News
Card, mobile credential, payment and security
FEATURED
PARTNERS

Biometric basics

CampusIDNews Staff   ||   Jun 15, 2007  ||   ,

The Biometrics Consortium, a leading industry group, defines biometrics as “automated methods of recognizing a person based on a physiological or behavioral characteristic. Among the features measured are; face, fingerprints, hand geometry, handwriting, iris, retinal, vein, and voice. Biometric technologies are becoming the foundation of an extensive array of highly secure identification and personal verification solutions.”


Dissecting the definition:

“automated methods”
Biometrics, as the term is used today, require machine readability.

“of recognizing a person”
Obviously, the intent of biometrics is to define human beings.

Now this is where it gets interesting …

“based on a physiological or behavioral characteristic.”
Biometrics can measure physiological traits (things that we are) or behavioral traits (things that we do). In the list of biometrics presented in the definition, the physiological traits include face, fingerprints, hand geometry, iris, retinal, and vein. Each of these is a trait that we are, in essence, born with rather than a trait that we learn. The list also includes two behavioral traits of handwriting (e.g. signature) and voice. Other common behavioral traits include our gate (our unique walk) and keystrokes patterns.

“identification and personal verification solutions.”
Too often, the concepts of identification and verification are used interchangeably. They are, in fact, very different processes-and they form one of the most fundamental concepts in biometric technology. Actually, the concepts extend across the range of what we consider ID technologies.

Identification involves knowing or isolating an individual from a group. It is an act of knowing one from many. Verification, also commonly called authentication, involves ensuring that an individual is who he or she claims to be-or who the identifying entity believes he or she to be. This process is an act of ensuring one to one.

Eric Bowman, biometric industry representative and standards body member, describes it this way:

” Identification occurs when an individual’s characteristics are being selected from a group of stored images. Called a “one-to-many” search, the question put to the machine is “Do I know you?” The search algorithm will search a database and return a likely list of candidates.”

“Authentication occurs when an individual makes a claim of identity by presenting a code or a card. Called a “one-to-one” search, the question put to the machine is “Are you who you claim to be?” In this sense, the individual’s characteristics are being measured against an enrolled image that is stored on a token or in a local database with the image presented.”

Biometric systems are great at authentication. Think of it this way, the system is told what record from the database to use for comparison. It need only check the biometric from the reader with the one stored in the database.

Systems have a much harder time with identification using biometrics. These one-to-many searches require that the system compare the biometric from the reader to the world of biometrics stored in the database.

To illustrate this concept, imagine a system in which all individuals were required to provide a fingerprint when they applied for a driver license. If that system were to be used for authentication, a law enforcement officer would take the license number and a finger scan of an offender and transmit it for comparison against the stored biometric that matches that license number. If it matches, the individual could safely be assumed to be the person on the license and the license could reasonably be considered valid. This is biometric authentication.

If the offender refused to provide a drivers license, the officer might take a finger scan and transmit it for comparison against all existing records. If a match was found that person’s identity could then be known. This is biometric identification.

According to Cathy Tilton, representative of biometric vendor Saflink and chair of the INCITS biometric technical committee (M1), “most biometric deployments are done using one-to-one matching so they need a claimed identity (e.g. card, token, number). If it is a personal workstation then you don’t need the claimed identity cause it can be assumed to be the user of the PC.”

The concept of templates

Creating and entering a biometric indicator into a system is known as enrollment. During the enrollment process a digital representation of the individual’s characteristic (either physiological or behavioral) is created. For the purpose of this discussion, we will continue to use the example of a fingerprint biometric.

The process begins by scanning the finger. Though there are different methodologies and techniques used to create the templates, a common means involves mapping the minutia of the finger. Think of minutia as the key points on the print (e.g. the core, bifurcation points where the ridges branch apart). By mapping these points and then applying a mathematical algorithm to this map, a number representation of finger is created and enrolled into the system.

When a biometric identification of authentication procedure is conducted at a later point, the same process occurs. The finger is scanned, minutia is mapped, the algorithm applied, and the number or template is created. This newly created template can then be compared to other templates in the database for identification or compared directly to the individual’s record for authentication.

The margin for error

Because biometric systems rely on numeric templates, there is a margin of error inherent in a system. This is a necessary trade-off, because if a system was to check actual fingerprint images against other images, the processing power, transaction times and cost would be unacceptable. There are two categories of errors that occur in biometric systems: False Rejection Rates (FRR) also known as Type I Errors and False Acceptance Rates (FAR) also known as Type II Errors.

FRR describes frequency that an authorized person is deemed unauthorized (i.e. a match for the biometric is not found) by the system. FAR is the frequency with which an unauthorized person is deemed a match by the system. Obviously, in most situations it is more dangerous to falsely accept a person (e.g. grant an intruder access) than falsely reject a person (e.g. deny an employee access).

FRR and FAR are inversely proportional to each other. When one is lowered, the other will typically rise. Thus, biometric systems are a balancing act between false acceptance and false rejection.

Today many systems enable the thresholds for FAR and FRR to be adjusted based on time, level of threat, or other criteria. As an example, during the day or during times of normal threat levels a military installation might choose to lower the FRR to ensure that few if any authorized personnel are denied access. After hours or during times of heightened security threats, the FRR might be raised to make it virtually impossible for unauthorized persons to gain entry.

In the next issue, we will continue the investigation of biometric concepts exploring key issues including the location of the stored biometric (e.g. in a database, on a card or token) and the location for conducting the comparison (e.g. match on card, in the reader, at the system level).


This article originally appeared in a 2004 issue of SecureIDNews.

|| TAGS:
Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

RECENT ARTICLES

sia corporate credential design guide cover art

Security Industry Association releases comprehensive guide to secure credential issuance

The Security Industry Association (SIA) released its Corporate Credential Design Guide, a new resource produced by their Credential Design Working Group. It specifies recommended practices for the design and implementation of credentials and badges by card issuers and security teams. Though the document is geared toward corporate issuers, it is also highly relevant and beneficial […]
Senator Roem supporting Virginia hunger free campus meal swipe bill
Mar 26, 26 /

Virginia lawmakers table statewide campus meal swipe donation mandate for now

The bill that would enable students at virtually all Virginia universities to donate their unused meal plan credits fell just short of passing this year. State lawmakers voted to continue debating the proposal – supported by the nonprofit Swipe Out Hunger organization – in the 2027 session. The bill was introduced by Senate Democrat Danica Roem […]
UT Austin Mobile ID
Mar 26, 26 / ,

Student-driven mobile ID initiative at UT Austin gets go-ahead

The University of Texas at Austin is preparing to launch mobile student IDs beginning in the 2027–28 academic year. The initiative, driven by strong student demand and backed by university leadership, will allow students, faculty, and staff to access campus services using credentials stored in their mobile wallets. Spearheaded by Student Government leadership, the effort […]
CIDN logo reversed
The only publication dedicated to the use of campus cards, mobile credentials, identity and security technology in the education market. CampusIDNews – formerly CR80News – has served more than 6,500 subscribers for more than two decades.
Twitter

Great inverview on the Public Key Open Credential (PKOC) standard with ELATEC's Jason Ouellette, Chairman of the Board for the @PSIAlliance.

Attn: friends in the biometrics space. Nominations close Friday for the annual Women in Biometrics Awards. Take five minutes to recognize a colleague or even yourself. http://WomenInBiometrics.com

Load More...
Contact
CampusIDNews is published by AVISIAN Publishing
315 E. Georgia St.
Tallahassee, FL 32301
www.AVISIAN.com[email protected]
Use our contact form to submit tips, corrections, or questions to our team.
©2026 CampusIDNews. All rights reserved.