LAW OF EVIDENCE - PROJECT

BIOMETRIC EVIDENCE

Submitted by
A.K.SACHINDHAR
Reg. No. BA0150037

Under the Guidance of

Mrs. DEEPA MANICKAM
Department of Law of Evidence

TAMIL NADU NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL

(A State University Established by Act No.9 of 2012)
Tiruchirappalli
Tamil Nadu - 620009

APRIL – 2018

1
 Contents
INTRODUCTION: ............................................................................................................................................ 3
FUNDAMENTALS OF BIOMETRIC RECOGNITION AND HUMAN INDIVIDUAL
DISTINCTIVENESS ......................................................................................................................................... 3
BIOMETRIC SYSTEMS AND TRUSTWORTHINESS ................................................................................. 4
BASIC MECHANISM OF BIO-METRIC EVIDENCE: .................................................................................. 5
BIOMETRICS COLLECTION ......................................................................................................................... 5
BIOMETRIC MODALITIES: ........................................................................................................................... 6
Fingerprint.......................................................................................................................................................... 6
Hand Geometry .................................................................................................................................................. 8
Speaker recognition: .......................................................................................................................................... 9
IRIS RECOGNITION :.................................................................................................................................... 10
IRIS Recognition Technology ......................................................................................................................... 11
Iris structure ..................................................................................................................................................... 11
BIOMETRIC SECURITY ............................................................................................................................... 12
Sociological concerns ...................................................................................................................................... 12
BIOMETRIC APPLICATIONS ...................................................................................................................... 13
BIOMETRICS DEVICES ............................................................................................................................... 14
BIOMETRICS VERSUS FORENSIC ............................................................................................................. 15
Where to use BIOMETRICS? ......................................................................................................................... 15
WIRELESS BIOMETRICS ............................................................................................................................. 15
TELEBIOMETRICS........................................................................................................................................ 16
CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................ 16
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................................ 18
 biometric recognition: challenges and opportunities,j.n.pato. .............................................................. 18

2
INTRODUCTION:

Biometric evidence is automatic identification of living individuals by their behavioural and physiological
patterns.A person can be uniquely identified by their distinguishing biological traits.These biometric
expansions are easily observable in different forensic identification areas, e.g. face, fingerprint, iris, voice,
handwriting, etc. The crimes taking place in our nation are increasing day by day.the development of
biometrics help us to investigate the crime scenes.Biometric authentication and their template security are
increasing day by day over the past decade with challenging requirement in Automated Secured Personal
Authentication System.
The reason behind on this demand for the replacement of old-fashioned automatic personal identification tools
by new one. The old-fashioned automatic personal identification tools uses traditional approaches such as
Personal Identification Number (PIN), Login Id, ID card, password etc. to verify the cognizance of a person,
are no longer considered as credible adequate to gratify the security concern for person identification system.
A biometric scheme delivers automatic recognition of a person depending on some particular trait.

FUNDAMENTALS OF BIOMETRIC RECOGNITION AND HUMAN INDIVIDUAL

DISTINCTIVENESS
Biometric recognition systems are inherently probabilistic, and their performance needs to be
assessed within the context of this fundamental and critical characteristic. Biometric recognition involves
matching, within a tolerance of approximation, of observed biometric traits against previously collected data
for a subject. Approximate matching is required due to the variations in biological attributes and behaviors
both within and between persons.1 Consequently, in contrast to the largely binary results associated with most
information technology systems, biometric systems provide probabilistic results1.
There are numerous sources of uncertainty and variation in biometric systems, including the following:
• Variation within persons. Biometric characteristics and the information captured by biometric
systems may be affected by changes in age, environment, disease, stress, occupational factors, training and
prompting, intentional alterations, sociocultural aspects of the situation in which the presentation occurs,
changes in human interface with the system, and so on. As a result, each interaction of the individual with the
system (at enrollment, identification, and so on) will be associated with different biometric information.
Individuals attempting to thwart recognition for one reason or another also contribute to the inherent
uncertainty in biometric systems.2

1
Monika saini,biometric in forensic identification:application and challenges,2016-journal of forensic medicine.
2
Woodson, Robert E. “Biometric Evidence of Natural Selection in Asclepias Tuberosa.” Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 39, no. 2, 1953, pp. 74–79. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/88804.
3
 • Sensors. Sensor age and calibration, how well the interface at any given time mitigates extraneous
factors, and the sensitivity of sensor performance to variation in the ambient environment (such as light levels)
all can play a role.
• Feature extraction and matching algorithms. Biometric characteristics cannot be directly
compared but require stable and distinctive “features” to first be extracted from sensor outputs. Differences in
feature extraction algorithms affect performance, with effects sometimes aggravated by requirements for
achieving interoperability among proprietary systems. Differences between matching algorithms and
comparison scoring mechanisms, and how these interact with the preceding sources of variability of
information acquired and features extracted, also contribute to variation in performance of different systems.
For example, each finger of each person will generate a different fingerprint image every time it is observed
due to presentation angle, pressure, dirt, moisture, different sensors, and so on. Thus each person can produce
a large number of different impressions from a single finger—many of which will be close enough that good
algorithms can match them to the correct finger source3.

• Data integrity. Information may be degraded through legitimate data manipulation or

transformation or degraded and/or corrupted owing to security breaches, mismanagement, inappropriate
compression, or some other means. It may also be inappropriately applied to a context other than the one for
which it was originally created, owing to mission creep (for example, using the data collected in a domain
purely for the sake of convenience in a domain that demands high data integrity) or inappropriate re-use of
information (for instance, captured biometric information might be incorrectly assumed to be of greater
fidelity when transferred to a system where higher fidelity is the norm).
Principle: Users and developers of biometric systems should recognize and take into account the limitations
and constraints of biometric systems—especially the probabilistic nature of the underlying science, the current
limits of knowledge regarding human individual distinctiveness, and the numerous sources of uncertainty in
biometric systems.

BIOMETRIC SYSTEMS AND TRUSTWORTHINESS

Systems that perform biometric recognition exist within a constellation of other authentication and
identification technologies and offer some distinct capabilities and challenges4. Authentication technologies
are typically based on one of three things: something the individual knows, such as a password; something the
individual has, such as a physical key or secure token; and something the individual is or does.Biometric

3
Perry, Walter L., and John Gordon. “The Analytic Questions.” Analytic Support to Intelligence in Counterinsurgencies, 1st ed.,
RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA; Arlington, VA; Pittsburgh, PA, 2008, pp. 17–24. JSTOR,
www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/mg682osd.12.
4
ramn kapoor rainji,biometric evidence-challenges and opportunities,2010.
4
technologies employ the last of these. Unlike password- or token-based systems, biometric systems can
function without active input, user cooperation, or knowledge that the recognition is taking place.

Biometric systems, therefore, are not a general replacement for other authentication technologies, although
combining biometric approaches with other methods can augment security in those applications where user
cooperation can be inferred.
One important difference between biometric and other authentication technologies, such as tokens or
passwords, is that these other technologies place trust in cooperative users, allowing them to produce what
they possess or demonstrate what they know (through dependence on the user’s safekeeping of a card or
password).

BASIC MECHANISM OF BIO-METRIC EVIDENCE:

The diagram below shows a simple block diagram of a biometric system. When such a system is networked
together with telecommunications technology, biometric systems become telebiometric systems. The main
operations a system can perform are enrollment and test. During the enrollment, biometric information from
an individual is stored. During the test, biometric information is detected and compared with the stored
information. Note that it is crucial that storage and retrieval of such systems themselves be secure if the
biometric system is be robust. The first block (sensor) is the interface between the real world and our system;
it has to acquire all the necessary data. Most of the times it is an image acquisition system, but it can change
according to the characteristics desired. The second block performs all the necessary pre-processing: it has to
remove artifacts from the sensor, to enhance the input (e.g. removing background noise), to use some kind of
normalization, etc. In the third block features needed are extracted. This step is an important step as the correct
features need to be extracted and the optimal way5. A vector of numbers or an image with particular properties
is used to create a template. A template is a synthesis of all the characteristics extracted from the source, in
the optimal size to allow for adequate identifiability.

BIOMETRICS COLLECTION
Biometrics are typically collected using a device called a sensor. These sensors are used to acquire the data
needed for recognition and to convert the data to a digital form.
The quality of the sensor used has a significant impact on the recognition results. Example “sensors” could be
digital cameras (for face recognition) or a telephone (for voice recognition).

5
Woodward, John D., et al. “WHAT CONCERNS DO BIOMETRICS RAISE AND HOW DO THEY DIFFER FROM
CONCERNS ABOUT OTHER IDENTIFICATION METHODS?” Army Biometric Applications: Identifying and Addressing
Sociocultural Concerns, 1st ed., RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA; Arlington, VA; Pittsburgh, PA, 2001, pp. 21–32. JSTOR,
www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/mr1237a.11.
5
A biometric template is a digital representation of an individual’s distinct characteristics, representing
information extracted from a biometric sample. Biometric templates are what are actually compared in a
biometric recognition system. Templates can vary between biometric modalities as well as vendors. Not all
biometric devices are template based. For example, voice recognition is based on “models.”

BIOMETRIC MODALITIES:
It is a well known fact that different applications and environments have different constraints. For instance,
adequate fingerprint samples require user cooperation; whereas, a face image can be Captured by a
surveillance camera. Furthermore, Fingerprints are not available for many of the suspects on Watch lists.
There are also multiple biometric modalities for technical and financial reasons. Many scientists become
interested in developing a system based on their own research. Upon a successful implementation, venture
capitalist, interested in the implementation of such a system, commercialize a product. Therefore, wide
varieties of modalities are being researched and are available on the market6.

FINGERPRINT
The patterns of friction ridges and valleys on an individual's fingertips are unique to that individual. For
decades, law enforcement has been classifying and determining identity by matching key points of ridge
endings and bifurcations. Fingerprints are unique for each finger of a person including identical twins. One of
the most commercially available biometric technologies, fingerprint recognition devices for desktop and
laptop access are now widely available from many different vendors at a low cost. With these devices, users
no longer need to type passwords - instead, only a touch provides instant access. Fingerprint systems can also
be used in identification mode7. Several states check fingerprints for new applicants to social services benefits
to ensure recipients do not fraudulently obtain benefits under fake names. New York State has over 900,000
people enrolled in such a system.

Advantages:

• Subjects have multiple fingers.

• Easy to use, with some training

• Some systems require little space.

• Large amounts of existing data to allow background and/or watchlist

checks.

6
james wayman, anil jain, davide maltoni and dario maio,biometrics authentication systems.
7
Jain, Anil K., and Sharath Pankanti. “BEYOND FINGERPRINTING.” Scientific American, vol. 299, no. 3, 2008, pp. 78–
81. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/26000805.
6
• Has proven effective in many large scale systems over years of use.

• Fingerprints are unique to each finger of each individual and the ridge arrangement remains permanent
during one's lifetime.

Disadvantages:

•Public Perceptions.

• Privacy concerns of criminal implications.

• Health or societal concerns with touching a sensor used by countless individuals.

FACE:

The identification of a person by their facial image can be done in a number of different ways such as by
capturing an image of the face in the visible spectrum using an inexpensive camera or by using the infrared
patterns of facial heat emission. Facial recognition in visible light typically model key features from the central
portion of a facial image. Using a wide assortment of cameras, the visible light systems extract features from
the captured image(s) that do not change over time while avoiding superficial features such as facial
expressions or hair. Several approaches to modeling facial images in the visible spectrum are Principal
Component Analysis, Local Feature Analysis, neural networks, elastic graph theory, and multi-resolution
analysis8.

Some of the challenges of facial recognition in the visual spectrum include reducing the impact of variable
lighting and detecting a mask or photograph. Some facial recognition systems may require a stationary or
posed user in order to capture the image9, though many systems use a real-time process to detect a person's
head and locate the face automatically. Major benefits of facial recognition are that it is non-intrusive, hands-
free, continuous and accepted by most users.

Advantages:

• No contact required.

8
massimo tistarelli, christophe champod,biometric for forensic science.
9
Hausken, Liv. “The Archival Promise of the Biometric Passport.” Memory in Motion: Archives, Technology and the Social,
edited by Ina Blom et al., Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam, 2017, pp. 257–284. JSTOR,
www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1jd94f0.14.
7
 • Commonly available sensors (cam

eras).

• Large amounts of existing data to allow background and/or watchlist

checks.

• Easy for humans to verify results

Disadvantages:

• Face can be obstructed by hair, glasses, hats, scarves etc.

• Sensitive to changes in lighting, expression, and poses faces change over time.

• Propensity for users to provide poor-quality video images yet to expect accurate results.

HAND GEOMETRY10
These methods of personal authentication are well established. Hand recognition has been available for over
twenty years. To achieve personal authentication, a system may measure either physical characteristics of the
fingers or the hands. These include length, width, thickness and surface area of the hand. One interesting
characteristic is that some systems require a small biometric sample (a few bytes). Hand geometry has gained
acceptance in a range of applications. It can frequently be found in physical access control in commercial and
residential applications, in time and attendance systems and in general personal authentication applications

Advantages

• Easy to capture.

• Believed to be a highly stable pattern over the adult lifespan.

Disadvantages:

• Use requires some training.

• Not sufficiently distinctive for identification over large

Databases.

10
ibid
8
 • Usually used for verification of a claimed
enrollment identity.

• System requires a large amount of physical space.

Speaker/voice

SPEAKER RECOGNITION11:
Speaker recognition has a history dating back some four decades, where the output of several analog filters
were averaged over time for matching. Speaker recognition uses the acoustic features of speech that have been
found to differ between individuals. These acoustic patterns reflect both anatomy (e.g., size and shape of the
throat and mouth) and learned behavioral patterns (e.g., voice pitch, speaking style). This incorporation of
learned patterns into the voice templates (the latter called "voiceprints") has earned speaker recognition its
classification as a "behavioral biometric." Speaker recognition systems employ three styles of spoken input:
text- dependent, text-prompted and text independent. Most speaker verification applications use text-
dependent input, which involves selection and enrollment of one or more voice passwords. Text-prompted
input is used whenever there is concern of imposters. The various technologies used to process and store
voiceprints includes hidden Markov models, pattern matching algorithms, neural networks, matrix
representation and decision trees. Some systems also use "anti-speaker" techniques, such as cohort models,
and world models12.

Ambient noise levels can impede both collection of the initial and subsequent voice samples. Performance
degradation can result from changes in behavioral attributes of the voice and from enrollment using one
telephone and verification on another telephone. Voice changes due to aging also need to be addressed by
recognition systems. Many companies market speaker recognition engines, often as part of large voice
processing, control and switching systems. Capture of the biometric is seen as non-invasive. The technology
needs little additional hardware by using existing microphones and voice-transmission technology allowing
recognition over long distances via ordinary telephones (wire line or wireless).

Advantages

• Public Acceptance.

11
ibid
12
Richard S. T. Hunter, et al. “Evolution and Homeomorphy in the Development of the Paleocene Planorotalites Pseudomenardii
and the Miocene Globorotalia (Globorotalia) Margaritae Lineages.” Micropaleontology, vol. 34, no. 2, 1988, pp. 181–192.
JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/1485660.
9
 • No Contact Required.

• Commonly Available Sensors(telephones & microphones).

Disadvantages

 Difficult to control sensor and channel variances that significantly impact capabilities.

 Not sufficiently distinctive for identification over large databases.

IRIS RECOGNITION13 :
This recognition method uses the iris of the eye which is the colored area that surrounds the pupil. Iris patterns
are thought unique. The iris patterns are obtained through a video-based image acquisition system. Iris
scanning devices have been used in personal authentication applications for several years. Systems based on
iris recognition have substantially decreased in price and this trend is expected to continue. The technology
works well in both verification and identification modes (in systems performing one-to-many searches in a
database). Current systems can be used even in the presence of eyeglasses and contact lenses. The technology
is not intrusive. It does not require physical contact with a scanner. Iris recognition has been demonstrated to
work with individuals from different ethnic groups and nationalities.

Advantages

• No contact Required.

Disadvantages

 Difficult to capture for some individuals.

Easily obscured by eyelashes, eyelids, lens and reflections from the

• Public myths and fears related to “scanning” the eye with a light source.

• Acquisition of an iris image requires more training and attentiveness than most biometrics.

 Lack of existing data deters ability to use for background or watch list checks.

 Cannot be verified by a human.

13
ibid
10
IRIS RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY14

History of iris recognition technology

The idea of using iris patterns for personal identification was originally documented in an ophthalmology
textbook by James Doggarts in 1949, and may have been proposed as early as 1936 by ophthalmologist Frank
Burch. By the 1980's the idea had appeared in James Bond films, but it still remained science fiction and
conjecture

In 1987 two other ophthalmologists, Aran Safir and Leonard Flom, patented this idea, and in 1989 they asked
John Daugman (then teaching at Harvard University) to try to create actual algorithms for iris recognition.
These algorithms, which Daugman patented in 1994, are the basis for all current iris recognition systems and
products

The Daugman algorithms are owned by Iridian Technologies, and the process is licensed to several other
companies who serve as systems integrators and developers of special platforms exploiting iris recognition.

IRIS STRUCTURE
The iris is a protected internal organ of the eye, located behind the cornea and the aqueous humour, but in

front of the lens. The false acceptance rate for iris recognition systems is in 1 in 1.2 million, that is every 1 in

1.2 million iris is found to be unique in it’s features. It is seen in cross-section in the anatomical drawing

above. It is the only internal organ of the body that is normally visible externally. Images of the iris adequate

for personal identification with very high confidence can be acquired from distances of up to about 3 feet (1

meter).

The human iris begins to form during the third month of gestation. The structures creating its distinctive pattern
are complete by the eighth month of gestation, but pigmentation continues into the first years after birth. The
layers of the iris have both ectodermal and mesodermal embryological origin, consisting of (from back to
front): a darkly pigmented epithelium; pupillary dilator and sphincter muscles; heavily vascularized stroma
(connective tissue of interlacing ligaments containing melanocytes); and an anterior layer of chromataphores
and melanocytes with a genetically determined density of melanin pigment granules15.

The combined effect is a visible pattern displaying various distinctive features such as arching ligaments,
crypts, furrows, ridges, and a zigzag collarette. Iris colour is determined mainly by the density of the stroma
and its melanin content, with blue irises resulting from an absence of pigment: longer wavelengths

14
ibid
15
Kim, Jaeeun. “Establishing Identity: Documents, Performance, and Biometric Information in Immigration Proceedings.” Law &
Social Inquiry, vol. 36, no. 3, 2011, pp. 760–786. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/23011889.
11
differentially penetrate while shorter wavelengths are reflected and scattered, a phenomenon resembling that
which makes the sky blue .

BIOMETRIC SECURITY

A concern is how a person's biometric, once collected, can be protected. Australia has therefore introduced a
Biometrics Institute Privacy Code Biometrics Institute in order to protect consumer personal data beyond the
current protections offered by the Australian Privacy Act16.

SOCIOLOGICAL CONCERNS
As technology advances, and time goes on, more private companies and public utilities may use biometrics
for safe, accurate identification. These advances are likely to raise concerns such as:

• Physical - Some believe this technology can cause physical harm to an individual using the methods,
or that instruments used are unsanitary. For example, there are concerns that retina scanners might not
always be clean.

• Personal Information - There are concerns whether our personal information taken through biometric
methods can be misused, tampered with, or sold, e.g. by criminals stealing, rearranging or copying the
biometric data. Also, the data obtained using biometrics can be used in unauthorized ways without the
individual's consent.

Danger to owners of secured items

When thieves cannot get access to secure properties, there is a chance tha ers of secured itemst the
thieves will stalk and assault the property owner to gain access. If the item is secured with a biometric
device, the damage to the owner could be irreversible, and potentially cost more than the secured
property. In 2005, Malaysian car thieves cut off the finger of a Mercedes- Benz S-Class owner when
attempting to steal the car17

16
biometric recognition: challenges and opportunities,j.n.pato.

17
Stigler, Stephen M. “The Pedigree of the International Biometric Society.” Biometrics, vol. 63, no. 2, 2007, pp. 317–
321. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/4541341.
12
.

Cancelable Biometrics

Physical features, such as face, fingerprint, iris, retina, hand, or behavioral features, such as signature,
voice, gait, must fulfill a certain criteria to qualify for use in recognition. They must be unique,
universal, acceptable, collectable and convenient to the person, in addition, to reliability at recognition,
performance and circumvention. However, most importantly, permanence is a key feature for
biometrics. They must retain all the above features in particular the uniqueness unchanged, or
acceptably changed, over the lifetime of the individual. On the other hand, this fundamental feature
has brought biometrics to challenge a new risk. If biometric data is obtained, for example compromised
from a database, by unauthorized users, the genuine owner will lose control over them forever and lose
his/her identity.

BIOMETRIC APPLICATIONS
Biometric Time Clocks -Which are being increasingly used in various organisations to control employee
timekeeping.

Biometric safes and biometric locks- Provides security to the homeowners.

Biometric access control systems Providing strong security at entrances. Biometric systems are also
developed for securing access to pc's and providing single logon facilities.
Wireless biometrics for high end security and providing safer transactions from wireless devices like PDA's,
etc.

Identifying DNA Patterns of biometrics technology in identifying DNA patterns for identifying criminals,
etc.
Biometrics airport security devices are also deployed at some of the world's famous airports to enhance the
security standards.

13
BIOMETRICS DEVICES18

Optical Fingerprint Scanner

Our biometric hamster is the next generation model of popular and versatile biometric fingerprint readers.
Packaged in a comfortable, ergonomic design, this biometric scanner features the industry's most rugged and
advanced optical sensor using patented SEIR fingerprint biometric technology.

OptiMouse

OptiMouse is an innovative optical tracking mouse that can operate on almost any surface with exceptional
response, it features the industry's most rugged and advanced optical sensor using patented SEIR fingerprint
biometric technology.

iGuard - Integrated Access Control and Time Attendance System

iGuard is a complete solution combining a access control system and time attendance system. It utilizes
patented embedded web server technology combined with biometrics and smart card authentication. This is
the world's only available system that has achieved advanced operability using world- renowned TCP/IP
networking protocol without having to compromise on security.

Personal Fingerprint Safes

Biometric personal safes are revolutionary locking storage cases that open with just the touch of your finger.
These products are designed as "access denial" secure storage for medications, jewelry, weapons, documents,
and other valuable or potentially harmful items.

Biometric Fingerprint Door Locks

Your fingerprint is the key with our revolutionary fingerprint door lock. This amazing new product replaces
keyed locking mechanisms with a fingerprint sensor that actually recognizes who is and who is not authorized
to enter.

18
https://ssrn.com/abstract=299950, bender's immigration bulletin, vol. 7, p. 150, 2002

14
BIOMETRICS VERSUS FORENSIC19
While both biometrics ad forensic involves human recognition biometrics is typically applied using automated
techniques to prevent situation application such as gaining access to sensitive information or to a secured
facility . Forensic applications typically occur after a crime has occurred,and may not use fully automated
methods.Forensic methods are often used to assist in the legal process.

Forensic usually requires days of processing and are held to much higher accuracy requirements.

WHERE TO USE BIOMETRICS?

Biometric use involve controlling access to physical locations(laboratories ,buildings etc.Biometrics can be
used to determine whether or not a peson is already in database such as for social service or national id
applications. Biometrics can be used in environments where recognition of an individual is
required.Applications vary and range from logical access to a personal computer to physical access of a
secured laboratory.They can be used in a variety of collection environments as identification systems.

Biometrics are also used for accountability applications such as recording the biometric identities of
individuals.

WIRELESS BIOMETRICS
As biometrics systems improve, become smaller and require less power for operation, the potential to integrate
into new application grows. The ability to operate the biometrics verification solution from battery supply is
unprecedented. Previously, biometrics have been used in combination with personal computers and based on
a stringent platform to maintain reasonable performance.

However, as the technology for fingerprint recognition is being miniaturized and streamlined for performance,
new avenues of application can be found when technologies are integrated together in small, simple and stand-
alone packaging.

Wireless biometrics will consists of both the hardware and software for the fingerprint scanning devices that
will be embedded in wireless handheld devices. The solution will come as a bundle of a range of validation,
transaction management and content protection services based on the devices.

19
https://ssrn.com/abstract=962968, science, vol. 309, p. 892, august 2005

15
TELEBIOMETRICS20
Telebiometrics applies biometrics to telecommunications and telecommunications to remote biometric
sensing. With the emergence of multimodal biometrics systems gathering data from different sensors and
contexts, International Standards that support systems performing biometric enrollment and verification or
identification have begun to focus on human physiological thresholds as constraints and frameworks for "plug
and play" telebiometric networks.

Attending to these wetware protocols has become particularly urgent in the context of a recent study
suggesting possible pathological effects from RFID transponders implanted in dogs. Dogs are frequently used
as model organisms in the study of human disease.

CONCLUSION
Many gaps exist in our understanding of the nature and extent of distinctiveness and stability of biometric
traits across individuals and groups. No biometric characteristic is known to be entirely stable and distinctive
across all groups. Biometric traits have fundamental statistical properties, distinctiveness, and differing
degrees of stability under natural physiological conditions and environmental challenges, many aspects of
which are not well understood, especially at large scales. Complicating matters, the underlying biological
properties and distribution of biometric traits in a population are generally observed only through filters
interposed by measurement processes and instruments and subsequent biometric feature extraction.

Thus, the development of a science of human individual distinctiveness is essential to effective and appropriate
use of biometric recognition. Better understanding of biometric traits in human beings could be gained by
carefully designed data collection and analysis. The biological underpinnings of physical distinctiveness and
the stability of many biometric characteristics under natural physiological conditions and environmental
challenges require further justification from basic biological and empirical studies. Importantly, the underlying
distinctiveness of a biometric trait cannot be assessed apart from an understanding of the stability, accuracy,
and inherent variability of a given measure.
Another fundamental characteristic of biometric recognition is that it requires decision making under
uncertainty by both the automated recognition system and the human interpreters of its results. A biometric
match represents not certain recognition but a probability of correct recognition, while a nonmatch represents
a probability rather than a definitive conclusion that an individual is not known to the system. That is, some
fraction of results from even the best-designed biometric system will be incorrect or indeterminate: both false
matches and false nonmatches will occur.

20
ibid
16
Moreover, assessing the validity of the match results, even given this inherent uncertainty, requires knowledge
of the population of users who are presenting to the system—specifically, what proportions of those users
should and should not match. Even very small probabilities of misrecognitions—the failure to recognize an
enrolled individual or the recognition of one individual as another—can become operationally significant
when an application is scaled to handle millions of recognition attempts. Thus, well-articulated processes for
verification, mitigation of undesired outcomes, and remediation (for misrecognitions) are needed, and
presumptions and burdens of proof should be designed conservatively, with due attention to the system’s
inevitable uncertainties.

17
BIBLIOGRAPHY
 Monika saini,biometric in forensic identification:application and challenges,2016-journal of forensic
medicine.
 Woodson, Robert E. “Biometric Evidence of Natural Selection in Asclepias Tuberosa.” Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 39, no. 2, 1953, pp. 74–
79. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/88804.
 Perry, Walter L., and John Gordon. “The Analytic Questions.” Analytic Support to Intelligence in
Counterinsurgencies, 1st ed., RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA; Arlington, VA; Pittsburgh,
PA, 2008, pp. 17–24. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/mg682osd.12.
 ramn kapoor rainji,biometric evidence-challenges and opportunities,2010.
 Woodward, John D., et al. “WHAT CONCERNS DO BIOMETRICS RAISE AND HOW DO THEY
DIFFER FROM CONCERNS ABOUT OTHER IDENTIFICATION METHODS?” Army Biometric
Applications: Identifying and Addressing Sociocultural Concerns, 1st ed., RAND Corporation, Santa
Monica, CA; Arlington, VA; Pittsburgh, PA, 2001, pp. 21–32. JSTOR,
www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/mr1237a.11.
 james wayman, anil jain, davide maltoni and dario maio,biometrics authentication systems.
 Jain, Anil K., and Sharath Pankanti. “BEYOND FINGERPRINTING.” Scientific American, vol. 299,
no. 3, 2008, pp. 78–81. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/26000805.
 massimo tistarelli, christophe champod,biometric for forensic science.

 Hausken, Liv. “The Archival Promise of the Biometric Passport.” Memory in Motion: Archives,
Technology and the Social, edited by Ina Blom et al., Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam,
2017, pp. 257–284. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1jd94f0.14.
 Richard S. T. Hunter, et al. “Evolution and Homeomorphy in the Development of the Paleocene
Planorotalites Pseudomenardii and the Miocene Globorotalia (Globorotalia) Margaritae Lineages.”
Micropaleontology, vol. 34, no. 2, 1988, pp. 181–192. JSTOR, JSTOR,
www.jstor.org/stable/1485660.
 Kim, Jaeeun. “Establishing Identity: Documents, Performance, and Biometric Information in
Immigration Proceedings.” Law & Social Inquiry, vol. 36, no. 3, 2011, pp. 760–786. JSTOR,
JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/23011889.
 biometric recognition: challenges and opportunities,j.n.pato.

 Stigler, Stephen M. “The Pedigree of the International Biometric Society.” Biometrics, vol. 63, no. 2,
2007, pp. 317–321. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/4541341.
 https://ssrn.com/abstract=299950, bender's immigration bulletin, vol. 7, p. 150, 2002

 https://ssrn.com/abstract=962968, science, vol. 309, p. 892, august 2005

18