Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: Best Biometric Authentication System?

kwelch007 writes I run a network for a company that does manufacturing primarily in a clean-room. We have many systems in place that track countless aspects of every step. However, we do not have systems in place to identify the specific user performing the step. I could do this easily, but asking users to input their AD login every time they perform a task is a time-waster (we have "shared" workstations throughout.) My question is, what technologies are people actually using successfully for rapid authentication? I've thought about fingerprint scanners, but they don't work because in the CR we have to wear gloves. So, I'm thinking either face-recognition or retinal scans...but am open to other ideas if they are commercially viable.

127 comments

  1. RFID/card scanner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't you all already badges or dongles or something along those lines?

    1. Re:RFID/card scanner by Albanach · · Score: 5, Interesting

      An AC first post hits the nail on the head. I'd have thought RFID would be faster, less intrusive and possibly more reliable. Pretty sure it would be cheaper to implement too.

      Unless you're worried about people using someone else's card to authenticate, this seems like the smart solution. Still, I can't believe you haven't thought about this, so maybe there's some reason you feel RFID wouldn't be suitable.

    2. Re:RFID/card scanner by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      Use a YubiKey and OAuth APIs. Neat and clean, and although it can be spoofed, it's not easy to do, and is as good as you get without easy to screw up "bio-authentication" infrastructure. You keep it on your badge fob, and it squirts a string as a single-key USB keyboard. Grab the string, use it with OAuth or as an identifier, and be on your way with sanity.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    3. Re:RFID/card scanner by hawguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't you all already badges or dongles or something along those lines?

      Hard to get any faster and more convenient than this -- if they don't want to make employees scan their badges, put an RFID reader in the chair and keep the badge in the back pocket and it's automatic and instant every time they sit down at a workstation.

      Unless they have a specific need for biometrics, there's no point in using it.

    4. Re:RFID/card scanner by Kohath · · Score: 2

      If you really need security for some reason, use it to match the person to the badge at the clean room entrance. That will keep someone from using a stolen badge.

    5. Re:RFID/card scanner by TubeSteak · · Score: 2

      RFID bracelets are fairly cheap.
      If a little thought is put into the readers' placement, authentication should require minimal/no interruption of the workflow.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    6. Re:RFID/card scanner by mlts · · Score: 2

      Biometrics might be useful for a lock inside an already secure company, but there are so many existing solutions which work well with AD that cobbling up something can be pointless:

      1: Why not just use regular AD authentication at the core, move the 2FA to the edges? I've seen this done using either Cisco software for VPNs, Citrix, or other means. This way, to authenticate from machine to machine (especially if UNIX machines use AD and there isn't a way to add anything), it doesn't take that much. Plus, this saves cash by limiting the need for devices to users who need access from the edge.

      2: If 2FA is needed, then why not use CAC/PIV-like cards? Since the US government uses them everywhere, the software for them is available.

      3: If 2FA is needed on the cheap, there might be a way to use the Google Authenticator (part of OAuth as above). I have that in place on ESXi machines and other items. However, this means that one has to have a device showing the numbers with them at all times. I also use OAuth and Google's app for Linux VMs that are Internet facing as a backup if I don't have the local machine's SSH key in the remote VM's authorized keys file.

      Personally, I'd just use 2FA on the edges or on the machines which need that security. Fewer hassles, and cheaper.

    7. Re:RFID/card scanner by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      I'd agree with this. There comes a point where people will avoid 2Fa if it's too complex. Sometimes it just means adding nagware, timeouts, and WTFs if auth isn't congruent. And sometimes weird legal dept senses of regulatory compliance enter in, too. Indeed that might be the best place to start if audit/compliance is a side-output of the process.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    8. Re:RFID/card scanner by davester666 · · Score: 5, Funny

      cattle tag on the ear should also work well. readily available and not that expense. software already available for tracking movement and what milking station they are in. what more do you need?

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    9. Re:RFID/card scanner by mlts · · Score: 2

      If I were deploying an infrastructure, I'd go with a basic layered approach. The sensitive stuff either gets put behind RDP or Citrix (with 2FA to log onto those servers), the edge VPNs definitely get 2FA, and average machines get "plain old" AD logins with passwords changed on a normal schedule like every 30-60 days [1].

      Of course, network topology, and devices play a large part in this. This way, a guy in receiving who gets malware on his machine will not affect the computers in finance or development. Endpoint management also helps, but one doesn't know if an attack is going to go through a compromised Web browser, physical access, a disgruntled employee, or a backdoor in the main firewalling routers that allows an attacker full access from the Internet.

      Wise use of 2FA does help, but as with all security products, it isn't a magic bullet.

      [1]: Only real difference I'd have is that all user accounts would have expiration dates in AD going 6-12 months out, and that an audit every month or so would pop up ones about to expire so the accounts can be either re-validated or left to expire until explicitly needed again. This way, an admin that left quietly where people forgot about won't always have access, as it will end up getting pulled automatically.

    10. Re:RFID/card scanner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yubikey uses one of the NIST curves that the NSA is thought to have compromised,

    11. Re:RFID/card scanner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's something you have, OP was asking for verifying something you are, i.e. fingerprints, eye scan, etc. It's a part of your body, a badge can be used by someone else without knowing.

    12. Re:RFID/card scanner by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2

      An AC first post hits the nail on the head.

      And AC first post -- and the first responder to the post -- appear to have been hit on the heat by a very heavy nail.

      RFID, chips, cards, etc. have the SAME "problem" as IP addresses: they don't identify the PERSON, they just identify the identification. If someone else is holding the identification, all bets are off.

      Entire movies have been made about this. I mean, come on.

    13. Re:RFID/card scanner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, instead of a fingerprint, he could use a nose print, unless the users are masked as well...

    14. Re:RFID/card scanner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The female staff don't have dongles, you insensitive clod.

    15. Re:RFID/card scanner by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      RFID, chips, cards, etc. have the SAME "problem" as IP addresses: they don't identify the PERSON, they just identify the identification. If someone else is holding the identification, all bets are off.

      The author of the article mentioned using a simple login/password, but rejected the idea because it was too much hassle - not because someone else could use the login/password combination. This means that the employees can be trusted not misuse their credentials.

    16. Re:RFID/card scanner by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      It means nothing of the sort. That is an assumption on your part.

      OP asked for "biometric" ID, okay? RFID, cards, NFC, etc. are not biometric. The reasonable assumption -- unlike yours -- is that he had an actual REASON for asking for biometrics. People don't usually say things for no reason.

      Having said that, most consumer-level biometrics are crap. Despite Apple, fingerprint readers are crap for any kind of real security. Capacitance is even worse. You can foil it (pun intended, but pretty literally) with a tinfoil hat.

      My best recommendation would be voice recognition. Not the "Hey, Google, where is 'Interstellar' playing nearby?" kind but the person-recognition kind. It's pretty good and not terribly expensive.

    17. Re:RFID/card scanner by hughk · · Score: 1

      Plain RFID is fairly good, especially in an already secure area. Otherwise, the oldie but goodie: Something you have, Something you know. RFID+easy PIN? RFID as it doesn't need contact and will work through protective "skins" and a 4-digit PIN to identify the card owner.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    18. Re:RFID/card scanner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm thinking that depending on the level of cleanliness this CR of theirs has (I know little on the subject), there might be different obstacles to whatever technology is intended to have access to the biometric thing to test.... fingerprints vs gloves, voice vs mask, retina vs head cover, and a few others

        I mean, if they are in a full body suit like that old Pentium commercial with the guys dancing to disco music, anything biometric is out of the picture for sure; if they have Walter-White-in-the-lab suits that they can't remove while in the room, then it's only slightly easier.

      I don't see why the other AC can't be wrong to suggest an RFID solution. Something like a bracelet tag worn under the suit that they just pass over the sensor. Of course someone can give their bracelet tag to anyone else that has access to the room, or forget to run the bracelet by the sensor, or a number of other things that, as was said before, we've all seen in countless movies; but I think it's fairly safe to assume the people that do have access to the room, have enough discipline to have been given access to the room*.

      *... we've seen that in countless movies too but, guess what, this is not a movie.

    19. Re:RFID/card scanner by Outtascope · · Score: 1

      What's the matter? Not looking forward to the calls to IT support to change your Biometric Password? Biometric authentication is generally a Very Bad Idea (tm), with a very narrow set of reasonable use cases. Typing a password being "a time-waster" does not, in my opinion, meet the criteria.

      I'm with the parent here, use HID or something similar.

    20. Re:RFID/card scanner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I used to work with biometrics and security systems, the inside joke at the office was that the most secure and convenient system would be an anal probe where you would sit down and it would biometrically read your inners and log you in, and when you stood up, it automatically logged you off.

      There may of been some drawbacks from this idea, but at the time we could not think of any.

    21. Re:RFID/card scanner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is really the only solution, as anything else (finger scanner, retinal scan, even face scan) will probably end up slower than entering a password in practice given current implementations (unless this is for hunt and peck typers).

    22. Re:RFID/card scanner by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      OP asked for "biometric" ID, okay? RFID, cards, NFC, etc. are not biometric. The reasonable assumption -- unlike yours -- is that he had an actual REASON for asking for biometrics. People don't usually say things for no reason.

      Probably because biometrics are easy. You're pretty much guaranteed to have a face or a finger that can be scanned inside the cleanroom. Except of course, you're wearing gloves, and no mention if they have to put on the burka-like hoods as well (which eliminate all but iris scans, which may not be possible if it's an enclosed hood).

      Basically the problem is they need fast logins that preferably they don't have to type usernames and passwords (which can be hard on clean-room capable keyboards), so an RFID badge can easily solve the problem since they're usually already clipped to the badge holder on the suit.

      And given it's a cleanroom, that usually means it's in a more secured area so primary screening can validate badge against other measures, so unless one also planned on swapping or swiping a badge post-entrance, you can be reasonably sure the credentials are valid.

      Plus, usually for stuff involving computers, you either use a login and password, or biometrics. RFID cards or ID badges don't typically come to mind when wanting an authentication solution.

    23. Re:RFID/card scanner by John.Banister · · Score: 1

      If there was concern about people using someone else's card, a hybrid system could be used. On coming in to work, a person could pick up a random RFID bracelet, put it on, and "clock in" at a station that does a biometric check and assigns that bracelet to that identity for the day. Design the bracelets so that removing one causes it to signify that it has "clocked out," and needs a visit to a clock-in station to become valid again.

    24. Re: RFID/card scanner by slashdotwannabe · · Score: 1

      Fair point, but easily mitigated with a simple procedure: When people come into the clean room have a person check their ID and give them a one time use RFID wristband like those tear off wristbands you get at nightclubs. Now that RFID value is tied to the owner and cannot be changed without destroying it. When their shift ends, take it off, throw it away, lather, rinse, repeat.

      --
      This comment is my opinion and does not represent an official position of Donald Trump or others I do not work for
    25. Re:RFID/card scanner by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      RFID, chips, cards, etc. have the SAME "problem" as IP addresses: they don't identify the PERSON, they just identify the identification. If someone else is holding the identification, all bets are off.

      OK, that's a valid point.

      (1) This is a working environment where people are already wearing all-encompassing clothing, so there are no issues about requiring someone to wear another item of clothing/ equipment.
      (2) So ... put the RFID (or equivalent, I'll use "RFID*" to cover all such technologies) onto a wrist/ neck/ waist band, or shoulder holster or some other contraption which it is physically impossible to remove. (Minor caveats for first aid treatment, but in such cases you'd almost always start treatment by getting the IP (Injured Person) out of the controlled zone, so "Meh".)
      (3) As part of that process, the security guard / team leader/ whatever verifies ID (company badge, user-name/password, whatever ; and these are likely to be regular teams so Mark-1 Eyeball is likely to be as good as anything) and that it matches the RFID* ... sign off paperwork, job done.
      (4) People enter controlled zone, setting off proximity sensors as they enter, as they perform decontamination, go through into fully controlled zone, sign off hand-over notes ... and get on with their jobs.

      For what it's worth, when I turn up at the heliport to go to my work, I am always searched - pockets and baggage - for mobile phones, cameras, tools, drugs (including prescription ones) ... we don't consider it an invasion of personal privacy or shit like that. It is simply the way that this business has always been

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  2. None by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    I work in a class 10 clean room with shared workstations as well. Manual log-in to every workstation is the norm. Biometrics are not only infeasible in such a cleanroom environment, they are more trouble than they are worth, and also not likely to be as secure as you hope (or as reliable).

    1. Re:None by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not about security; it's about having documentation on who's doing what step without having to do all that typing.

      I don't understand why they're infeasible, though. Obviously a glove would prevent a fingerprint scanner from working, but not a finger-length reader (it's something that you put your hand on and it measures the lengths of each finger). Why wouldn't a retinal scanner work? Or a voice print?

      dom

    2. Re:None by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      Above posts already answered the question, though. Biometrics make no sense when the point is not really authentication (which assumedly in a clean room was already done) but identification. Just use an RFID tag. Done.

  3. why bio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Why does it need to be bio-metric? How about scanning a fob or access card?

  4. A probing question by sinij · · Score: 1

    A blood sample and DNA analysis is most accurate. Now, what is your definition of "best"?

    If, for example, you want to incontinence users the most, you could devise biometric authentication based on anal probing. If you want to inconvenience the least, some form of gait analysis would work, but with a significant number of false positives.

    1. Re:A probing question by daremonai · · Score: 5, Funny

      I don't know if incontinence here was a Freudian slip or not, but it sure was an accurate one.

    2. Re:A probing question by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Well, I would surely shit myself if I was told that I had to jab my finger with a lance every time I needed to log in...

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    3. Re:A probing question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gattaca here we come!

  5. Camera + QR code on lapel. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...easy - as long as you trust your employees not to cheat the system (and here, you probably can).

    1. Re: Camera + QR code on lapel. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah a QR code on an existing badge or lanyard or something would be very easy to implement.

      If someone messes around with the QR code or something then you have bigger problems. It would be highly unlikely and if you have a random token generated into each QR code (that you can verify on the back end) then someone would basically have to take someone else's QR code / card which is a bigger issue than you should worry about.

      Either way, I don't think the solution should need to be bio based, just force them to login/identify one way or another or they don't get access. They may not like it but they will respect it.

    2. Re:Camera + QR code on lapel. by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      If you can't trust them not to cheat the system, you shouldn't be letting them in the clean room at all.

  6. if it is just time you are on the wrong track by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most biometric systems actually take longer to input and process the authentication than actually entering your password from something like a smartcard or even user/password combination.

  7. Smart cards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Smart cards.

  8. Why does it need to be biometric? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not just use a short range RFID or NFC? The use could wear the RFID/NFC tag. It would be a permanent tag issued to each user, or a temporary NFC sticker issued to each user each day. A sticker could even be stuck to the back of their glove. A few thousand stickers and a NFC reader is going to be far cheaper than a retinal scanning system at each workstation.
    I doubt biometric would work very well, being a clean room there is more than just gloves being worn. Masks and goggles will also interfere with biometrics.

    1. Re:Why does it need to be biometric? by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      The Apple Pay implementation of NFC would work, though because of the gloves you would have to use the passcode option, not the fingerprint.

  9. Bastille by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone who can stand listening to Bastille for more than five seconds is a 14-year-old girl. If this is what you're trying to authenticate, you're in luck!
     
    captcha: mutation

  10. why biometric? by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

    Biometric certainly ISN'T a time saver. They tend to be slow to process and take more time than most authentication options. Surely you have proximity cards or smart cards, they are a far easier, faster option if all you are after is a fast easy authentication method.

    1. Re:why biometric? by Dan+East · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Biometrics make even less sense because this is a clean room. Use clip on RFID tags on the end of their shirtsleeves or some other physical location that allows the RFID tag to be read while the worker is at the station.

      --
      Better known as 318230.
    2. Re:why biometric? by cHALiTO · · Score: 1

      I don't know what kind of biometric auth systems you used, but I used to work for a company that did professional AFIS systems and on the side some fingerprint auth solutions including usb readers, and they were damn fast and convenient.
      I imagine it must depend on what you use. There's consumer grade shit like apple's or MS's fingerprint scanners and software, and then there's pro stuff.

      Plus, to the guy that said ADN was secure. It's not. Fingerprints are far more secure (the gummy bear trick and others have been taken care of quite some time ago), since they're actually unike, unlike adn (twin brothers come up as matches, for example).

      Another option would be Iris scanners. Retinal scan is more invasive and you have to put your eye up to a reader.. Iris scan can be done with a simple camera while you look normally at your terminal screen, and it's pretty fast.

      --
      "Luck is my middle name," said Rincewind, indistinctly. "Mind you, my first name is Bad." -- Terry Pratchett
  11. Identify or Authenticate?? by aXis100 · · Score: 1

    If you're just trying to *identify* a user then a simple RFID, barcode scanner or QR reader would be fine. I assume the staff have ID cards so just incorporate it with that.

    For any steps that specifically require security authentication then you use a password as well.

  12. Cameras by randall77 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Just buy a point-of-sale camera system that department stores use. They keep weeks of video from dozens of cameras available for review. Requires 0 overhead in the common case when no audit is required. It is really easy to find out who did what given a time and camera ID. Use humans for your facial recognition, they're actually really good at it.

    1. Re:Cameras by pepty · · Score: 1

      For quite a few cleanrooms the common case is the logs are used for QC and for compliance with federal regulations. Also, people in clean rooms are generally wearing safety glasses, masks, bonnets, etc, so figuring out who is who would be a pain.

    2. Re:Cameras by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So put a camera in the airlock (where they authenticate themselves anyways), and write big fat numbers or initials on their equipment.

    3. Re:Cameras by Russ1642 · · Score: 1

      It's hard to identify people that are all dressed the same and are wearing face coverings. Thankfully, team sports figured out a HUNDRED YEARS AGO how to do this. Put big numbers and/or names on their backs. Done.

  13. Kinect by uberbrainchild8437 · · Score: 2

    A kinect sensor could be hooked up to a computer and do a decent job of telling one user from another. You don't need a large open space if you simply want to identify who is working where.

    --
    http://Anveto.com - Web Design, SEO, Marketing, Analytics & Security
  14. Next Great Thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I've been sitting on this idea for authentification using seat mounted sphincter scans.

    Go ahead and make your jokes, but ..

    1. Re:Next Great Thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could sell 10s of million a year to Mac users.

    2. Re:Next Great Thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot to include the goatse link.

    3. Re:Next Great Thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Smell sensor mounted to seat, 1 fart will gain terminal access.

  15. Hand vein scanner` by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I saw some video about hand scanner that uses your vein mapping. This is good because you dont need to touch it, and it'd be hard to replicate.

    1. Re:Hand vein scanner` by hawguy · · Score: 1

      I saw some video about hand scanner that uses your vein mapping. This is good because you dont need to touch it, and it'd be hard to replicate.

      But does it work through gloves?

    2. Re:Hand vein scanner` by stoploss · · Score: 2

      I saw some video about hand scanner that uses your vein mapping. This is good because you dont need to touch it, and it'd be hard to replicate.

      But does it work through gloves?

      Yes. You simply place your hand in the 3T MRI cavity, wait 45 minutes for the scan to complete, and voila, instant authentication!

  16. erg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Biometry is not good at authentication.

    It's the same thing as setting one password and using it for life, since you can't change your own biometrics.

    As a 2nd factor of IDENTIFICATION it is passable, however.

  17. Smell-o-vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A stink sensor ID scanner.

  18. FTFY by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    Go ahead and make your jokes, butt ..

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    1. Re:FTFY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy Shit!

  19. What *problem* are you trying to solve? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If there isn't a specific problem, how about you trust your workers and give up on being Big Brother?

  20. too complicated by roc97007 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > So, I'm thinking either face-recognition or retinal scans...

    Waayyyy too complicated and expensive and Charlie's Angels-ish. If all you're trying to do is identify which user performed which step, RFID is your friend. Have an RFID sensor integrated into the workstation, and require the user to "sign" their work with their badge before they can commit.

    Look at people going to work every day using RFID badges. If you want something faster than logging in with A/D credentials (which would have been my first suggestion), swiping a badge is pretty much as fast as you're going to find.

    Now, if people using each other's credentials is a concern, or security in general, then you're looking at using A/D credentials plus a badge ("something you know, and something you have"). I personally wouldn't go with biometrics until they've gotten cheaper and more foolproof. Maybe never.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    1. Re:too complicated by Matheus · · Score: 1

      I agree that this is not a great usage for biometrics... maybe if you were adding security to the whole lab not just a step verification.

      BUT if you were to go Biometric then you should use Iris (Not Retina or Face). It is the easiest, fastest and most accurate for 1-1 Verification (Assuming you get your tech from Morpho... they have a patent on the only good tech right now)

      Retina is just too invasive and doesn't give you any more (maybe even less) accuracy than Iris.. not really used much any more.

      Face is great these days (NOT Facebook/Apple's tech... "real" matching tech) but is not ergonomic for your use-case.

    2. Re:too complicated by cusco · · Score: 1

      I was just going to post the same, except to mention AOpix (haven't used a Morpho system).

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    3. Re:too complicated by cHALiTO · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I used to work at Morpho's base company (ex Sagem, french co.), and they had some good products. The fingerprint recogniton solutions were top notch too.

      Disclaimer: yes, I worked for them, but I don't now, not even working in biometrics now, and I couldn't care less how the company is doing, I'm not trying to advertise for them, I just think the tech they had when I was there was pretty good :)

      --
      "Luck is my middle name," said Rincewind, indistinctly. "Mind you, my first name is Bad." -- Terry Pratchett
  21. Part 11 much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If you have to meet something like 21 CFR part 11 you better start explaining why you want to implant proximity rfid in your employees's hands.
    If you are serious though - a usb OTP+keypad unlocking a X509 certificate on same (chip & pin EMV)

  22. None! by Vlijmen+Fileer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Can this discussion about the supposed virtues of biometric identification / authentication please die?
    Biometric properties are like usernames. Not like passwords. They don't "authenticate" anybody; your fingerprints e.g. can be found all over the world, right in the open.
    And on top of that they are BAD usernames, because they can not be changed. Once your biometric identity has been compromised, you have to give up to whole identification / authentication /system/, because the property can not be changed!

    1. Re:None! by profplump · · Score: 1

      There are lots of perfectly valid uses for biometric identification, including as a factor in a set of authenticated credentials. It's just that they shouldn't be used alone (nor should any other factor).

    2. Re:None! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can this discussion about the supposed virtues of biometric identification / authentication please die?

      No, of course not. It's very hollywood-ish, looks shiny, and hey, courts use it so it must be reliable, right?

      Besides, the parties rolling it out (eg. banks, employers) don't actually have your best interests in mind. They have their best interests in mind, and if that means making the customer or employee expendable, no skin off their nose.

      There are lots of perfectly valid uses for biometric identification

      Actually, no. Their properties are exactly what you don't need at all if you care about the person identified, as GP pointed out and you didn't even bother to refute--because you cannot, since this is the entirety of the presumed usefulness of the idea. Note the only way you care about this identified person in the "make sure we hang the actual perp" sense in the one place where it's been in widespread use for over a century: The criminal investigation. Also note that there is even after all this time no rigorous body of scientific work backing the assumptions the courts make about biometrics.

      So, no, those "lots of perfectly valid uses" are clothes to the emperor, professor.

  23. most biometric sensors have significant issues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    For instance, at any given time, about 2% of the population cannot be authenticated by fingerprints (people with various conditions that result in very thin skin tend to have no prints; occupational reasons: bricklayers; people with fingerprints that don't generate decent features for the recognizers, which look for whorls and gaps and points; people with cuts and disfigurement)
    It is also incredibly easy to make fake fingers that will false positive the system. No, you don't need to cut the finger off the person: you can do it from almost any latent print, or even if you know the template that's being matched, you can generate an artificial fingerprint that "hashes" to the same feature vector.

    Most biometric schemes relying on motion (gait analysis, mouse movement, keyboard dynamics) have accuracies of about 80% (10% false reject, 10% false accept), although for any given person, some modalities work a lot better and others are really bad. Maybe you've got a very distinctive gait, but not a particularly distinctive touchpad swipe. Gait analysis, for instance, is sensitive to the type of shoes the person is wearing (heel height, flats, sandals), and, of course, injuries (stubbed toes, twisted ankles, blisters) throw it off.

    Retinal scans (which actually look at the blood vessel pattern) is quite good, but you have to peer into the scanner.

    I'd suggest some form of RFID, in a two stage process. Use a two factor authentication for an initial login and then just interrogate the RFID to make sure the same person is still in the vicinity and hasn't left. A standard FIPS-140 PIV-2 badge would probably work ok: it has the on card crypto chip to help with TFA, and has the RFID responder. There's tons of suppliers of cards, readers, etc.

    You could also, of course, tattoo a bar or QR code along with human readable tracking number onto your employees faces or other easily visible position and use conventional video processing for automated recognition, and human backup can use the numbers. You'll need to periodically change the codes, of course, to avoid spoofing.

    Or, implant an RFID transponder: they're widely used in the livestock industry: milking parlors, slaughterhouses, etc.

    1. Re: most biometric sensors have significant issues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the gloves are of the latex variety, a finger vein scanner may do the job and a hand geometry reader definitely would

    2. Re:most biometric sensors have significant issues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For instance, at any given time, about 2% of the population cannot be authenticated by fingerprints (people with various conditions that result in very thin skin tend to have no prints; occupational reasons: bricklayers; people with fingerprints that don't generate decent features for the recognizers, which look for whorls and gaps and points; people with cuts and disfigurement)

      Also, it is a problem for senior citizens. The older you get the smoother your fingers get (as your skin thins) and fingerprints get difficult to capture - fingerprint scanners we were testing at work had a difficult time on some days with my prints, and other days no problem. I have a copy of my admission papers to an, umm, mandatory public housing facility. My old prints are so very much clearer than they are now.

    3. Re:most biometric sensors have significant issues by dszd0g · · Score: 1

      It is my understanding that retinal scans can be effected by health conditions. Pregnancy, diabetes, glaucoma, retinal degenerative disorder, AIDS, syphilis, malaria, chicken pox, lyme disease, leukemia, lympoma, sickle cell, congestive heart failure, atherosclerosis, and significant cholesterol change can all apparently cause a retinal scan to change. While some employees may find detection of these conditions as a good thing, other employees may find it invasive.

      Research seems to indicate that iris scans change over time. Companies that use Iris scanners need to rescan everyone every year or they get false negatives, which may or may not be an issue.

      I think using an ID card scan like was mentioned above, makes the most sense.

      --
      This message is encrypted with Quad ROT-13 to protect the author's copyright under the DMCA.
  24. Yay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the first question I've seen posted on Slashdot in about 6 months that actually qualifies under the "...for nerds, stuff that matters" moniker. Awesome! Keep it up people.

    1. Re:Yay by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Dear me, you must have missed "THREEE-DEEE PRINTERS IN SPAAAAAAAAACE" that was posted... um, yesterday.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  25. Why biometrics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought the standard was a barcode on the badge and a scanner at the workstation.

  26. ID cards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just get some ID cards and card scanners.

  27. Bracelet by well_in_theory · · Score: 1

    How concerned are you about taking the responsibility of authenticating "I am me" away from the individuals? If you can trust them with that information, then the RFID bracelets that a lot of barstaff use seems like it would be perfect. Swipe your arm past the scanner whenever you need to say "this is me" -- works great unless you are worried about people swapping them.

  28. Biometric authentication is flawed by manu0601 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Biometric authentication is flawed, because your credentials are not secret, and they cannot be revoked. If an attacker manage to clone for instance your fingertip, you cannot change it, you need to change the authentication system.

    Biometric may be reasonably used as a second factor, for instance for unlocking a smart card

  29. WTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Typical engineer, overcomplicating the shit out of a simple problem. Give each guy a 4-digit PIN and have them hammer it in to the workstation to gain access.

    1. Re:WTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well they already have an unnecessary clean room so having some more steps to slow down and make things more expensive makes perfect sense.

    2. Re:WTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Works for retail and restaurants.

  30. First born child. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Think about it how many people are going to try to 'hack' your system by stealing babies to bypass your lock down? Also it would help if you depose of the id token after each use.

  31. Best biometric? A doorman with good memory. by Culture20 · · Score: 2

    Welcome back Mr. Soandso. Nice weather tonight isn't it?

  32. Betty White Fleshlight biometric device for men by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Betty White Fleshlight biometric device for men

    1. Re:Betty White Fleshlight biometric device for men by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those are just normal with sandpaper glued inside. Not worth the extra $50 for branding and sandpaper.

  33. Bad advice by s.petry · · Score: 1

    I don't agree with any kind of single Auth mechanism even inside the network, except for personal workstations. A single keylogger on a compromised machine can ruin your business pretty quickly this way, and it has happen(s|ed) often enough that people should know better by now. Maybe 1FA on your workstation, but any server access should be 2FA all the time regardless of your location and connection type. At least as important, if you are using 1FA for a workstation the LDAP infrastructure should be completely separate from your server's LDAP infrastructure.

    That said, I would only use Biometrics as a 3rd factor unless you are dumping millions into the technology, monitoring, and maintenance. Even in Government work you won't find too much for biometric authentication. Retina scans can be spoofed with a photo, fingerprints can be lifted and spoofed (not enough data points to be accurate) even with some very expensive hardware, etc... "Normal" security is a strong password (with some strict rules) plus RSA like tokens. Even high end security uses controlled equipment in a secure location with at least 3 different lock mechanisms on the door as the primary control. Once inside, you will still normally find 2 factor Auth (depending on the classification).

    Biometrics has a cool factor, but not a very good authentication system without pumping lots of money into it.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  34. devil's advocate: bio for 200 people by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Although I tend to agree with the general consensus that RFID or even QR codes would be a simpler way to identify (not authenticate) people, there is one important nuance being missed in all the criticism of biometric.

    In the most common use cases for biometrics, you're attempting to distinguish this one person vs the other 5 billion people in the world. That's hard. This particular use case is much simpler - we're judt asking it to distinguish betweenthe 50 or so people who work in this clean room. In other words, we know it's one of these 50 people, which of them is it? That's a much easier question, so high accuracy should be easy to achieve with the right settings.

  35. Who wants this? You? by vinn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Having spent a lot of time around such things, I have to ask, who's project is this? Who wants this? Just you?

    If your boss or the CEO is asking for this - great. Go do it. That's your job. (The RFID comments seem in the right ballpark.)

    If a mid-level manager or you is taking this on as a pet project, then you need to do some soul searching. This doesn't seem to have much immediate benefit to the bottom line of the company. This doesn't drive revenue creation and it doesn't drive product development. Almost every time I hear someone say, "We need to track X", I rarely ever hear someone else say, "Get me the statistics on X". Tracking shit is easy, crunching the numbers to calculate metrics isn't. If this is simply compliance tracking, listen to the guy who says to install cameras and then dump it to a crapload of drives. If there's an audit, hand over the video and let the auditors sort it out.

    There is a whole lot of not-your-job in here and very little hero making to be done.

    --
    ----- obSig
  36. vein scan is THE biometric by markdavis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Deep vein scan (typically of the palm) is the only biometric that I would find acceptable from a privacy standpoint. It can't be "stolen" or "lifted", it is not visible from a reasonable distance, it can't be easily scanned without the user's consent. It requires being "alive". It is reliable and simple to acquire. I have used it and seen it in action... very impressive.

    Fingerprints are horribly abused and left everywhere and can't be read through gloves. Easily copied and fooled.

    DNA is extremely expensive, extremely slow, has severe privacy implications, and is left everywhere.

    Facial recognition is not extremely accurate, is often slow, and is the WORST biometric from a privacy standpoint.

    Retina scan is complex and probably the most expensive besides DNA.

    Finger spread biometric is inaccurate and insecure (can be obtained from a distance via

    1. Re:vein scan is THE biometric by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Completely agree - I was about to post a vein scanner option when I saw your comments. Some ATMs in Japan use them!

      http://www.fujitsu.com/us/services/biometrics/palm-vein/

      I don't understand why more products don't utilise vein scanning - seems like the holy grail of biometrics!

  37. Other Options by NeveRBorN · · Score: 1

    I doubt you'll find a biometric solution that will work well in that environment. Have you considered NFC tokens such as YubiKey? What about active or passive proximity authentication?

  38. lab book by Goldsmith · · Score: 1

    Ok, so retina scans and face recognition don't work well in a clean room because your people should be wearing goggles and a face mask. Also, this is about training, not technology.

    I'm assuming you're going beyond the standard card access machines that are already in most clean rooms and are instead trying to track "little" things like wash steps, microscopy review, hot plate use, etc.

    Electronic lab notebooks (this used to be a server-workstation kind of thing, but it's tablets now) are great for this. This doesn't need to be very expensive or have custom software. Plus you add the convenience of carrying a clock & timer around with you. If you want to get really fancy, you can have the tablet talk with your computers (I've never seen that done in a lab or clean room, but it's probably out there).

    You should be able to get all the info you need right now with your regular clean room notebooks and some transcription. If that's not happening, you're simply not keeping records well enough. That's a training problem. The level of record keeping required for good clean room work is very high. Trying to find a technology solution to remove good note taking practice can encourage sloppy work unless all of your tooling is set up for complete automation (in which case, you wouldn't be asking this question...).

  39. Not a cheap solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To start I would not recommend face recognition. It is a very, very, very infant technology and weak system. Simple changes to a person's face (think movember) can cause false negatives, but worse is the possible false positives. That leaves to current retinal scans and fingerprints. I personally like retinal scans because its a lot harder to fake. If you are looking for a hand scanner/fingerprint system use an acoustical fingerprint scanner. It can scan through thick gloves. Its possible to fake it with a fake hand since it only maps the contours of a hand.

    Either way add a pin to whichever system you choose. Biometrics is good for two factor systems not as a single authentication system.

  40. Rear Identifier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has anyone ever verified if butt puckers are truly unique?

  41. Iris or RFID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As someone else mentioned badges with RFID / smart cards would work. All the people saying retinal are wrong, it's iris. The Retina is the back of the eyeball and proper retina biometrics work with the oxy-hemoglobin in the blood, basically vein recognition in the eyeball. Iris is the funny coloured part of the eye that expands and contracts to light, even infrared (thats how we check for liveness).

    1. Re:Iris or RFID by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Reading the brain waves of a person may be better, harder to fake at least.

      But a smart card with PKI and pin code authentication for every access needed will go a long way. If it's a facility with extreme security measures also add guards at checkpoints and make sure that some accesses requires counter-signed authentication.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  42. RFID and strong authentication in a clean room by rlh100 · · Score: 1

    In a clean room, swiping a badge each time is hard. Use RFID in a wrist band. The hand needs to push a button. Put a reader next to the default button so pressing the button authenticates with RFID. For non-default operations requires a RFID swipe. Could the reader be an IoT (Internet of Things) device?

    Strong authentication with an RFID device in a clean room environment is easy. Put the RFID wrist band on under the bunny suit. Require the user to authenticate on a computer with their RFID wrist band inside the clean room before anything will work. Two users can not swap wrist bands because they would have to wear them outside the bunny suit which is visually obvious.

    A wrist band could work easily any manufacturing environment if the company does not need strong authenticati

    Weak authentication is easy. Strong authentication is hard.

  43. RFID + biometric with biometric at cleanroom entry by Michael_Paoli · · Score: 1

    At the point of entry to the clean-room, use RFID + biometric (and possibly also PIN or password). That effectively reasserts RFID in possession of the authenticated person upon entry to clean-room. Policy should enforce that RFID is to be on the person from entry to exit of clean-room. Then just use the RFID until they exit the clean-room. If any operations in the clean-room are so crucial as to require additional authentication/audit beyond that, add cameras+recording and/or additional authentication where reasonably called for, but don't overburden every step and authentication within the clean-room - after all that's part of the issue you're trying to solve. RFID should mostly suffice with sufficient controls upon entry and suitable policy and enforcement thereof.

  44. Stool samples by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Authentication based on stool samples should be perfect.

    1. Re:Stool samples by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a stool sample.

  45. Why biometrics? by Ihlosi · · Score: 1

    Can't you just (wirelessly) scan an ID card/badge?

  46. PalmSecure perhaps? by mufflon · · Score: 1

    Fujitsu PalmSecure is rather straightforward. Scans your palm veins using IR, which means a reasonable chance to scan through gloves and other material

  47. Face recognition in cleanroom? Really? by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

    In all the cleanrooms I have been in face masks have been required. Human breath has a lot of water droplets in it.
    How are you going to get a face recognition off someone in clothes like this?
    The employees are not allowed to take off their face mask for a scan. Suggesting it would get you laughed at and fired at the places where I worked.

    Just use RFID scanners with the access badges they already have or with RFID bracelets like mentioned in other posts. For additional security: have a guard at the door. Once an employee checks in have him verify that it's the right person with a picture on his screen.
    Or facial recognition there. Before the face mask goes on.

    --
    Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
  48. Be consistent by danielr7z · · Score: 1

    No matter the kind of authentication used: if it cannot be linked to your applications (e.g. via SSO), it is useless.

    You say you cannot enforce personal login in "shared workstations" (what do you mean by "shared"? I hope you are not sharing user sessions). How would you enforce the use of other methods?

    I guess you first should set a clear security policy, then look for an appropriate technology. Which access (physical, OS, application) do you want to authenticate / log, and how? As other commenters pointed out, which security level must be accomplished at each phase / step / location?

  49. RFID/card scanner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you don't have usable ID cards or dongles, son't have too many people working the same machines, and trust people to id themselves you could make a board with big pushbuttons. Just have them do a login for the person whose button it was. There are buttons the size of 2"x2", with clear front, so you can make them all different color, or have workers names on them or anything. Worker comes in, he smacks his button, and he is logged in. One touch login.

  50. To actually respond to your question... by gruntled · · Score: 1

    Iris recognition is the easiest and most reliable; the reason it's less popular is it was wildly overpriced until the patents on the technology expired a few years ago, but since then a number of players have entered the market and you can actually play with free software that will perform iris recognition via a Webcam, which might be all you need. Retinal scanning feels extremely invasive to users; you generally need people to put their forehead up against a rest and hold still and users typically won't accept it outside of an extremely sensitive environment. In contrast iris scans can be performed from several feet away, very quickly, and generally work through glasses and contacts. Iris recognition typically also works well with people who have a number of different diseases (like diabetes, which can dramatically affect retinal patterns over a very short timeframe) or conditions that affect the eye, unlike retinal scanning, including most of the common conditions that cause blindness (except cataracts). Fingerprint recognition has gotten a bad rap because in general use people don't want to have any false negatives, so operators tune the environment to be less sensitive, leading to lots of false positives (my fingerprints get read as your fingerprints). But it's true that prints can be affected by things like dehydration and the local environment; they can also be simulated if you're sufficiently motivated, but that's made infinitely more difficult if you combine your biometric with a PIN (though it can't be argued that prints are left lying around everywhere, so it's probably not the best biometric you could choose). In addition a surprisingly large number of people -- like maybe two percent -- simply do not have usable fingerprints; it's actually a diagnostic criteria for some medical conditions. (I have actually had a couple of jobs that dealt directly with use of biometrics as a form of authentication).

    In general I think the other comments are on the money: Keypad and PIN sounds like the way to go. If you're trying to create something automated, then contactless cards / dongles are the other solution but as others have noted, this isn't bulletproof since without some other factor (something you know or something you are) it's possible for one person to use somebody else's device.

  51. Handcuffs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have people go through a security checkpoint when entering, and AT THE CHECKPOINT have the person's ID PHYSICALLY ATTACHED TO H/H PERSON. Like handcuffs with the ID attached to them. When they leave they turn in the ID cuff-badge. Make it something unobtrusive (not too much like actual cuffs but that can't be removed or can't be removed non-destructively and that automatically resets on removal.

    At the end of shift or day, when cuffs are turned in that tells you when people leave, giving you personnel accountability, and even if someone runs off with one, you simply make them automatically invalidate after time or when removed from the room or building, etc.

    Even if someone yanks one off inside of a booster-bag body suit, it would be designed to reset itself when it lost contact with the radio signal inside the facility so it can't be misused or abused.

  52. 3 Levels of Authentication (and then extra layers) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. What you have (physical credential)
    2. What you know (pass phrase)
    3. Who you are (biometrics)

    If you are trying to identify an employee to the 3rd level and you are in an environment that does not lend itself to physical biometrics (finger, face, palm, vein, etc) then be ready for extra time in the log-on process. RFID systems to track individuals can be easily worn under clean suits, and these credentials can open doors, track movements, and using different types of readers can be used for a proximity log-on without further credentials. If you are worried about employees sharing or swapping badges, then you can add Voice recognition and Voice activiated pass phrase entry. Just put a mic at the workstation location, add voice recognition software to identify the individual, and couple that with a pass phrase log-on. This will touch on all 3 levels. It will take a second or two longer to log-on, but you will track log-on to the individual level and also prevent (deter) any badge swapping.

  53. None. Use a biometric as a username only by popoutman · · Score: 2

    Why do people constantly think to use biometrics as passwords, instead of as usernames? The fuzzy nature of digitising a biometric makes the system fall between two stools - few false negatives at the expense of many false positives or the reverse. In practice this means that you either need to scan a few times to get a good id, or run the risk of scanning as someone else. Given that you cannot change a biometric, why on earth would you use it as a single factor authentication system. It's far far better to scan a biometric then use a PIN as you can change a PIN... If you use a biometric as a single factor, you have not gained anything over the use of e.g. only a PIN, and you must allow for the possibility of false positives (equivalent of entering someone else's PIN).

    --
    - This sig deliberately left blank. Nothing to see, move along.
  54. iris by ddg · · Score: 1

    For your particular scenario iris recognition seems to be the most viable option. Iris is very fast and accurate and will not require removing gloves etc.

    1. Re:iris by ggendel · · Score: 1

      For your particular scenario iris recognition seems to be the most viable option. Iris is very fast and accurate and will not require removing gloves etc.

      Iris scans are much more reliable than fingerprints. However, they don't come without issues. The capture algorithm must include:

      * Dealing with occlusions. Either the top or bottom of the iris is usually occluded depending on racial origins.
      * Dealing with spoofing. For this a single snapshot is not reasonable. A sequence (video) is needed in order to check for pupil pulsations that indicate a live eye. In addition, you need to do spherical eye checks so you know you're not looking at a projection. The best system I worked on used random flashes of IR illumination to cause specularities on the surface of the eye. This also aided eye positioning for finding the eye and doing these checks.
      * Dealing with eye covering. Glasses and shields are a minor problem since they can distort the iris and they can reduce spoofing detection.

  55. Voice biometrics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try voice biometrics. The best provide in in this field is Nuance Communications.

  56. Try voice biometrics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try voice biometrics

  57. Assless chaps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Put the biometric scanners in the chairs, and have the employees wear assless chaps. Every time they sit down = buttprint authentication!

  58. RFID and strong authentication in a clean room by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Strong authentication with an RFID device in a clean room environment is easy. Put the RFID wrist band on under the bunny suit. Require the user to authenticate on a computer with their RFID wrist band inside the clean room before anything will work. Two users can not swap wrist bands because they would have to wear them outside the bunny suit which is visually obvious."

    Oh please, if people in this scenario absolutely want to fool your system requiring them to wear things inside the suit won't stop them.

    1. Cut the band, slide it out through a tiny hole on the suit
    2. Have the band inside your fist
    3. Have a wrong band to begin with, along with wrong credentials
    4. Have two bands, one in each wrist (left hand is me and right hand is my coworker)
    5. If the gloves arent integrated it's easy to switch bands.
    6. Make a cover band (haha) matching the suit for your band, could be a double sleeve.

    etc.. etc..

  59. Iris can be read from a distance: spoofable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Depending on whether you want to avoid spoofing, irises can be photographed (imaged?) from a distance. It's very, very difficult to image the retina from a distance to produce a spoof image.

  60. facial and retinal scans are out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    unless there's technology out there that reliably reads through face masks?

  61. Re:3 Levels of Authentication (and then extra laye by MadCow-ard · · Score: 1

    Interesting.... so you would suggest using Voice?

  62. There IS a better way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think a better way would be to use biometrics (if you really MUST use biometrics) to check out rfid marked clean room outfits.

    Once you have the person tied to the outfits, you can use the rfid marker to associate the person with the activity being tracked.

  63. Voice biometrics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Voice biometrics could be used here. Nuance has some commercial voice biometrics products available.