R. A. Hettinga quoted Dorothy Denning: >> What makes biometrics successful is not secrecy, but rather the >> ability to determine "liveness." .. [..] >> For instance, the Sensar iris-recognition system from Iridian >> Technologies (www.iridiantech.com) looks for the "hippus >> movement"-the constant shifting and pulse that takes place in the >> eye.
A thin contact lens with a fake iris would have "hippus movement", n'est-ce-pas? At least, it would "shift" like an ordinary eye. Is the "pulse" perhaps a waxing and waning? Even then, if you were prepared to be really gross, you could surgically stick a flexible fake iris over a real one (under the cornea), or transplant an iris or even an eye temporarily and connect the blood vessels etc... Whose liveness are we determining? Their other argument is that a contact lens wouldn't work as an imposter because it shifts around every time you blink - so don't blink for a few seconds, that's all the time it takes to gain access. Or move your head when you blink so the camera looses track. Or use superglue... Besides, large well-fitted contact lenses hardly move at all. I googled "hippus movement", and only got 3 hits, all (rehashed) Iridian press, including the above-mentioned from Dorothy Denning who should know better. Also, from The British Journal of Opthalmology: "Search Criteria: Anywhere in Article: "hippus movement" In Journals: Br. J. Ophthalmol. Your search retrieved zero articles." (from 1965 to 2001). Spin? Snake oil? -- Peter Fairbrother --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]