3D Holograms Detect Fake Signatures

Roland Piquepaille writes "Several sources reported last week that a new technique that produces 3D holograms of handwriting could be used to detect fake signatures on checks, credit card receipts or other important handwritten documents. Here are pointers to Nature, Scientific American or BBC News Online. Instead of using 2D techniques to look at the sequence of pen strokes in a signature, this new method is based on 3D micro-profilometry which permits to translate the writing into an image showing dips and furrows of the sample so that anomalies can be detected. If you plan to imitate your spouse's signature, beware! Forensics have a new and very efficient tool. As an example, for the use of ballpoint pens on normal paper, the success rate was 100%. You'll find more details, references and pictures in this overview."

Comments

I would be scared

[jonknee]

Is my own writing that similar? What happens if I let my guard down and something slightly different, will I be arrested for fraud by forging my own name?

Re:I would be scared

[jonknee]

Even for someone with a good sig, the pressure of having to be perfect might lead to slight variations. I even get nervous with the biometric scanners at Busch Gardens... And you can't really change your hand.

Re:I would be scared

[foidulus]

It probably could not stand alone in court, just like testimony of handwriting experts alone is not enough to convict somebody. They would still have to find a motive, an opportunity, history etc.

Re:I would be scared

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

>There's no way they'll succeed with my signature. It varies so much from one signature to the next

Indeed, and that is one of the key security properties of physical signatures. It's a kind of defense against replay attacks. Getting two completely identical signatures can be taken as evidence that one of them is a copy.

Re:I would be scared

[LiquidCoooled]

whilst your actual stroke path may be different for every signature, the order of your strokes and the pressure at different points means the paper is imprinted in a certain order.

For instance, as I draw a capital B, i do my downstroke first, then sweep back up, to the left slightly, and then around for the 3 portion from top to bottom.

Even if somebody had my signature as an example, they would not be able to match my drawing style.

it would take a video of me performing the signature as well as paper samples, making it much much more difficult to achieve, and easier to detect.

This is one of the key elements of a signature that to this point has not been able to be utilised.

I love being left handed - it is my security by obscurity ;)

And the rate of False Negatives?

[CharonX]

A 100% detection (at least in tests) of false signatures? Great!
How hard did they try to create a false signature?
And how often were legit signatures rejected? (I can create an algorithm that filters out 100% of the false signatures, guaranteed - it simply rejects all signatures it gets)

Will Tablet PCs Come of Age?

[PingPongBoy]

Just how much closer are tablet PCs to true handwriting recognition? Authentity aside, handwriting appears to be a simple enough problem, but so much emphasis is placed on context. People can write according to lines on a page. A semicolon shouldn't be confused for an i.

Now if we can detect forgeries with science, surely the science can be programmed to decide whether I wrote the number 1 or the letter l or even know the letter t is not the letter f and the > is not 7.

ANOTHER ROLAND!

[toxic666]

Why does /. keep posting articles submitted by this guy? He has a shabby blog on radio.weblogs.com and does a poor job stealing other writers work; the site is a blatant commercial effort. Yet /. keeps putting Roland's stuff up and linking to it.

What's the deal? Is there some kind of commercial payola a la 1970's radio? Maybe the editor has a thing going with Roland, in a Clinton-McGreevy-esque way.

*Cringe* I didn't need any of those mental images.

Pointless?

[Parallex]

I'm not sure there's any point trying to prove a signature is authentic -> How many of us actually have formal signatures that we can replicate perfectly? I know sure as hell that my signature is different every time and, sequence of pen stroke or no, I'd fail a test for my own signature every time. I'd instead be working on a way to place an electronic signature - some kind of stamp or something, that acts like a GUID for a person how needs to sign something.

Wait

[Rie Beam]

If we have the technology to read signatures, why not just make a device to write signatures? Surely it can't be that hard?

they just predicted the death of signatures

[Fratz]

You figure viable bionic hands may be, what, less than 50 years away? Maybe 30? How hard would it be (in concept) to interface a holographic scan of a known signature sample with your hand's control mechanism, and get it to generate an exact copy of, or an acceptable deviation from, someone else's signature?

We may not have the tech to exploit it in front of someone at the moment, but I can't imagine a laboratory-style exploit is far off.

This kind of revelation about how to protect against forgery ends up defining the victory conditions a lot better, giving attackers a clearer target.

Anyone want to take bets on how soon we'll see an article on an industrious group of technologists who modified a plotter to make automated signatures that cannot be detected as forgeries?