Each technology has advantages and disadvantages according to the application and the population using the devices. No single technology is "best" for all applications. Apart from the accuracy and security of the biometric devices, other actors that must be considered include convenience, ease of use, user acceptance, throughput, maintenance and cost
A password is by definition 'something that you know' and something that can therefore, be passed on to somebody else, or forgotten. The passing on of a password may take place through collusion, theft, or fraud. A biometric is either a physiological or behavioral trait, which is unique to an individual and cannot therefore be passed on, or duplicated easily. As a biometric is linked inextricably to a person the need to remember complex passwords is removed.
Biometrics can be a useful
tool in making identity theft more difficult. While a card can be
stolen, and a PIN may be fraudulently obtained, biometrics cannot be
easily copied and used. A biometric used with a token (such as a card)
and/or a password (or PIN) can be even more secure.
Biometrics provides a strong binding between the individual and the
proxy identifier used by the system to represent the individual. This
makes identity theft more difficult, and should lead to a reduction of
identity theft. However the strength depends on the integrity of the
binding between the biometric and the template. If there are weaknesses
in the integrity, an imposer may be able to undermine the binding and
attempt an identity theft. Generally it may be said that, although
biometrics are likely to reduce the scale of identity theft, they can
never guarantee to eliminate it.
For those occasions when a
biometric does not work, e.g. a fingerprint system will not work for
users without the appropriate fingers, and iris recognition may not work
for blind users, users who insist on not using biometrics may be allowed
to use an alternative method but there is no guarantee of this.
It is possible that some systems will not allow for an alternative
method. In any case, the alternative method is likely to be slower and
less convenient than the standard use of a biometric.
There are various reasons why a person may be unable or unwilling to use
a specific biometric, or biometrics generally, either temporarily or
permanently. For those reasons, implementers of biometric systems will
need to include alternative forms of identification and authentication.
However, there may be a penalty to users in that the alternative may be
slower and less convenient than the mainstream biometric authentication.
Fingerprint systems are in advantage in contrast to other biometric
systems as they can store more than just one or two biometrics. Some
systems may be able to store templates of all ten fingers. In case of an
injury to the finger usually used for identification, the user may chose
to use another finger. Even if he cannot use a whole hand, he can still
use fingers of the other.
To date DNA is not considered to be a biometric technology because it lacks the essential 'automation' element required to define it as such. However, rapid advances are being made in this area and it is very likely that DNA will become a 'mainstream' biometric in the not too distant future.
The use of a biometric is not always the solution to a particular user, or system requirement and a proper evaluation should always be carried out as to the business and security benefits that are anticipated. It is therefore, essential that the end user make a full assessment of the anticipated benefits, weighed against the cost in terms of capital expenditure, or system complexity.
Most biometrics now utilize a method of determining whether the donor of a biometric 'sample' is in fact alive. Even if such a system would not be equipped with such a feature, the probability for this to happen would be rather low. As organic material changes its properties rapidly, the criminal could use the stolen biometric (finger or eye) just two or three days, so the amount of money stolen from your bank account would be limited to 1000-1500$. The fact that such 'little' amounts of money can be stolen with a stolen biometric will prevent most criminals from committing such a severe criminal act, for which they would have to expect much higher penalty as for simple theft.
The police only have access to the fingerprints of persons who have been charged, or convicted of a crime, or who have donated them voluntarily for elimination, or other policing purposes. Non police, civilian fingerprint biometric systems do not keep images of the fingerprints that are used to enroll persons onto a system and it is not possible to reconstruct the image of a fingerprint from a mathematical 'map' that is produced after the image has been processed and discarded.
