<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Interaction Designer Craig Dennis &#187; Passport</title>
	<atom:link href="http://craigmdennis.com/tag/passport/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://craigmdennis.com</link>
	<description>The portfolio &#38; blog for Craig Dennis, an Interaction Designer based in South East England</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 13:11:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
		<item>
		<title>Fall On Your Face?</title>
		<link>http://craigmdennis.com/fall-on-your-face/</link>
		<comments>http://craigmdennis.com/fall-on-your-face/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:07:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Craig</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News and Rumours]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Facial Recognition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Passport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UK]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://craigmdennis.com/?p=698</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Many of you may be aware that this week the government in their &#8216;infinite wisdom&#8217; have decided to trial a facial recognition system at Manchester &#38; Stansted airports. Lets have a little look and see why this is a pointless endevour to &#8220;add another layer of security and not repace existing systems&#8221;. A test on... <a class="more" href="http://craigmdennis.com/fall-on-your-face/">Read more &#8594;</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Many of you may be aware that this week the government in their &#8216;infinite wisdom&#8217; have decided to trial a facial recognition system at Manchester &amp; Stansted airports. Lets have a little look and see why this is a pointless endevour to <em>&#8220;add another layer of security and not repace existing systems&#8221;</em>.</p>
<p><img class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-700" title="Facial Recognition" src="http://uploads.craigmdennis.com/2008/08/recognition1-235x256.jpg" alt="" width="235" height="256" />A test on this scale is normally to work out any final bugs out and produce a final system that will then be rolled out across the rest of a network. There will be a few problems with this for our beloved UK gov.</p>
<p>To start with, facial recognition technology has NEVER been accurate, throwing up false-negatives and false-positives so this appears to be as much a test of the technology as it is of the security system and as far as I can tell it is based on existing technology.<em> <a href="http://www.ips.gov.uk/passport/downloads/FINAL-BAG-annual-report-2007-v1_0.pdf">Concerns by the Biometrics Assurance Group (pdf)</a> [show]</em> that there is still work to do on both the facial recognition standards and the format in which facial images are stored.</p>
<p>This means the government is committing to a system upon which there are NO standards to adhere to, basically making this a very risky operation. Considering the biometric chip in passports may be incompatible with other systems, or at the very least when a standard is agreed UK residents with the chipped passports may end up having to get yet another passport. Normally standards are agreed before any large-scale testing goes ahead so this seems rather fool-hardy.</p>
<p>Now lets consider people who have gone before. There have been many tested applications of facial recognition and nearly all have been scrapped after only a few years in service as they proved impractical and inaccurate.</p>
<p><em>&#8220;Boston&#8217;s Logan Airport also ran two separate tests of facial recognition systems at its security checkpoints using volunteers. Over a three month period, the results were disappointing. According to the <a href="http://www.howstuffworks.com/framed.htm?parent=facial-recognition.htm&amp;url=http://www.epic.org/privacy/facerecognition">Electronic Privacy Information Center</a>, the system only had a 61.4 percent accuracy rate, leading airport officials to pursue other security options.&#8221;</em></p>
<p>If this is supposed to be another layer of security, to augment the already ludacris systems that are in place, then passengers will see no benefit at all. Did I mention that the whole process will be overlooked by securities staff who can step in at any time and take you to a real person to match your picture.</p>
<p>If all goes well and the system works then it will be truely remarkable and may indeed speed up entry through immigration. However, I feel that given the problems many people have with technology the so-called speed may be just an illusion, a target, similar to the fiasco at Heathrow Terminal 5. Not to mention the fact the system may fall flat on it&#8217;s face irrispective of whether people can use it. I predict an amalgation of both which will troublingly create some of the longest queues, the opposite of the desired effect.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://craigmdennis.com/fall-on-your-face/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Served from: craigmdennis.com @ 2012-02-10 13:37:26 by W3 Total Cache -->
