Wednesday, February 23, 2005

Biometric Passports

This is from the Economist. A lot of blaming America for the requirements, and if the statements are factual, I can't blame them. These passports are pretty much junk.

I think the writer over plays the problems with biometrics accuracy, and they choose some that have higher error rates (except for iris scans which they keep putting in the list, but is highly accurate compared to the rest). Many companies use some form of biometrics these days when high levels of security are needed. Usually though they are part of an authentication system, not an identification system. There is a difference. Usually the authentication system is multifactored while an identification is nearly always stand alone.

Quite surprising that these things are remote readable and not encrypted. That is utter stupidity. Talk about ease of stealing someone's identity as they walk by.

I'll have to look for the details on this and see just who actually is the major cause of this mess. The article does state that a UN agency, the ICAO put out the specification in 2003, so I'm wondering how America is the sole target of the derisive statements.

UPDATE: Here is the ICAO site on MRTD. (Machine Readable Travel Documents)
I don't see anything specifying who demanded what, but I don't know if this site would have that level of details. They do say that the facial recognition is their choice for the biometrics. What a lousy choice.

No comments: