You might find "facecerts" interesting.
http://www.computer.org/proceedings/dcc/1896/18960435.pdf
This is more for face-to-face checking, however.
For your remote scenario some sort of one-way hash to verify the image
might be intersting. It would have to allow for fuzzy matching after
hashing (
> Those are the hard problems. No one in biometrics
> has yet been able to solve them in a general way.
And the merchant example is the wrong application.
The merchant doesn't care WHO you are - that's a false premise.
Merchant cares if you can pay. Now, that's a completely solvable issue.
Of
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 12:16:36PM -0700, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
> Authentication is "Something you have / know / are."
[..]
> A picture glued into the card could be forged, but a
> smartcard (with more data area than a magstripe)
> could include a picture of the account holder,
> so a thief
Authentication is "Something you have / know / are."
A simple plastic credit card + PIN provides the first two,
including a photo provides the third "something you are".
A face is more often checked than the readily forgable
signature, in live authentication.
But as cameras become ubiquitous
(e.g
