Biometrics and IdentixGroup: Jessie Barter, James Fessel, Jason Qui, Ravi Tharisayi

Sources and Questions:

1. University of Indiana Website on Biometrics

http://www.indiana.edu/~hotmedia/archive/i202/php/_zmcmahon/biometrics-history.htmhttp://www.indiana.edu/~hotmedia/archive/i202/php/_zmcmahon/biometrics-tech.htmhttp://www.indiana.edu/~hotmedia/archive/i202/php/_zmcmahon/biometrics-social.htm

a. What is biometrics? What is the history? b. What are some current technologies? What are some future ones? c. What are the social issues surrounding biometrics?

2. “Fingerprint Matches Come under More Fire as Potentially Fallible”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB112864132376462238.html

a. How successful is forensic science? (Note statistics.)

3. Identix Websitehttp://www.identix.com/company/comp_overview.htmlhttp://www.identix.com/trends/http://www.identix.com/trends/finger.htmlhttp://www.identix.com/trends/face.htmlhttp://www.identix.com/trends/skin.htmlhttp://www.identix.com/trends/fusion.html

a. Describe the company’s mission. b. Where does Identix focus in the field of Biometrics? c. How do the Identix products work? d. What are the potential uses of Identix technologies?

4. “Biometrics Beyond Prime Time” (10/25/2005)http://www.biometricgroup.com/in_the_news/10_25_05.html

a. What are the prospects for the Biometrics industry?

5. “Cash or plastic? How about fingerprint?” (07/20/2005)http://www.biometricgroup.com/in_the_news/07_20_05.html

a. How is Biometrics being used currently? b. How might Biometrics be used in the future?

1. University of Indiana Website on Biometrics

History of BiometricsOne of the first known cases of humans using biometrics to identify one another was by early Chinese merchants. Joao de Barros, an explorer and writer, wrote that the Chinese merchants used a form of biometrics by stamping children’s palm prints and footprints on paper with ink. In doing this, the Chinese solved a way to distinguish young children from one another (Garfinkel 2000 38). This is one of the earliest known cases of biometrics in use and is still being used today.Though biometrics have been used throughout the history of the world, it never became a distinct field until an anthropologist named Alphonse Bertillion sought to fix the problem of identifying convicted criminals. The problem with identifying repeated offenders was that the criminals often gave different aliases each time they were arrested. This would prevent them from receiving the larger sentence for being a repeated offender. “Bertillion realized that even if names changed, even if a person cut his hair or put on weight, certain elements of the body remained fixed” (Garfinkel 2000 39). This led him to form a method of measuring the distinguishable parts of a person’s body, which never changed throughout their life such as the size of the skull or the length of their fingers. This system was called anthropometrical signalment and was very basic in its implementation. Whenever a person was arrested they were sent through a series of measurements that recorded the length and distinguishable marks of their bodies. This was all recorded on a card and filed away in groups with similar measurements. Whenever a new criminal was brought off of the streets, instead of taking down their name, the authorities would measure them and look for a matching card (Garfinkel 2000 39).This system was a huge breakthrough and was adopted by prisons and police stations across the country and world, though it did have some drawbacks. For instance, some large cities had huge databases of cards, and sorting and searching for a particular card could take days. Another drawback was that anthropometrical signalment was found not to be a totally unique biometric.  This was discovered when they found that some people shared the same measurements.Eventually quicker and more accurate forms of biometrics, such as fingerprint analysis, were formed and led to the end of anthropometrical signalment. As technology gets more and more advanced, the ways to distinguish the different biometrical signalments become more and more precise. This has led to field of biometric technologies that we live in today.

Biometric Technologies With today’s technologies becoming faster and more precise everyday, there is a need in the biometric field for new devices that are ever more accurate, cost effective, and simple in their implementation. Below is a list of the major biometric technologies that are available today, and ones that may be available in the near future. One of the newest biometric technologies which is thought to be the “ultimate” biometric identifier is also one of the most controversial biometric. This is DNA matching.DNA Identification- DNA is often called the code of life and is known to be totally unique for each person. The reason that DNA identification is so popular is because it is perhaps the most precise system of identification known, and is widely accepted as absolutely accurate. This is good from the standpoint of identification purposes but could prove to be a major problem in the future. For instance, the one of the most popular methods of taking DNA is by taking blood samples. People must label and do the job of entering the sample into a database, and people make mistakes. Hypothetically, your name could forever be associated with the blood of a criminal. When they commit a crime the DNA sample that is discovered at the crime scene will point to you (Garfinkel 2000 49). Another problem with DNA is that it is you. With the human genome project well underway, scientist may soon know someone’s faults, such as Attention Deficit Disorder or Alcoholism, by simply viewing their DNA. If a nationwide network of DNA information is made, there might be only a couple steps until everyone’s biological flaws are revealed. This is a major invasion of privacy and might prove to be the downfall of DNA testing. These are only a few examples of what the “ultimate” identifier can do, and the barriers that it must break to be accepted as an everyday biometric technology.Finger/Thumb Print-This is the most widely used biometric technology and is well known for its affiliation with law enforcement and the world of entertainment. This technology is very reliable and accurate, and has been backed up by many studies that verify that fingerprints are indeed unique. Simson Garfinkel states that "Fingerprints are fixed by birth and remained fixed for life. The marks truly are a unique signature: there is so much room for variation that no two people ever have shared, or ever will share, the same pattern" (Garfinkel 2000 41). Fingerprints are not stored by picture but by measurements of the distances between the ridges and loops of the thumbprint.Retina Scan- Retina scans have become very popular with corporations whom use biometrics because of the accuracy and speed in which they can be implemented. Retina scans test the pattern of blood vessels lining the retina of the individual human eye. Another

bonus of retina scans is that they are not revealed to the casual observer, and we do not leave behind traces of its detail as we might with fingerprints or DNA.Face Recognition- Face recognition is a technology that tests the distinguishing marks and measures of an individual human face. This technology has become popular in recent years due to the increased speed of computers. Also, it can be implemented quickly and is one of the least physically intrusive biometrics.Future Biometric Technologies-Listed below are a few of the biometric devices that have recently become available or are in the final stages of testing. These technologies hope to bring in accuracy with the least amount of personal intrusion possible.Vein Pattern Identification- This technology is like a retinal scan in that it uses special light to produce an image of one’s vein pattern in their face, wrist, or hand. An advantage to this technology is that veins are stable throughout ones life and cannot be tampered with.Ear Shape Identification- In recent years, some have came to recognize that the ear is as unique as a fingerprint. This technology merely measures the geometry of ones ear.Body Odor Identification- This system uses a sensor that takes your hand to identify your body odor. It then stores it in a digital database. This product is still in testing and when released may be too expensive for normal commercial use.Body Salinity Identification- This technology exploits the natural level of salinity in the human body, which is accomplished by an electric field that passes a tiny electrical current through the body.  As of now, individuals salinity levels are believed to be unique, but biometric identification is not the only use that we may benefit from this emerging technology.  The electrical current, which passes through the body, can also carry data.  Transfer rates, equivalent to a 2400-baud modem have been claimed.  This technology could include interaction between communication devices carried on the body such as watches or mobile phones. 

Social Impacts of BiometricsBiometrics is a technology that will either greatly benefit or burden us in the near future. With a boost in security and surveillance in the past few years, the only step that I think we can take is to implement biometrics into our everyday lives. Whether we do this by simply putting our fingerprints on our drivers license’s (as some states have already done, including California), or making DNA sampling a common task in peoples everyday lives, I cannot see us simply rejecting the technology. Warren and Brandeis, for instance, stated in 1890 that our privacy is ever so slowly being dissolved. This was brought to their attention after an uninvited guest had taken a photograph at a private wedding. This event prompted Warren and Brandeis to urge the public and the government to pass legislation to protect ones privacy (Garfinkel 2000 6). To this day there are no specific articles in the constitution that protects ones privacy. Over the last hundred years the public has been desensitized to everyday

events such as surveillance. Biometrics poses great benefits but also many drawbacks, one being that we may also become desensitized to its effects.A world in which biometrics grow to become common could greatly benefit us. Instead of paying cash at a grocery story, you could simply have an iris scan, and the store will put it onto your account. There would be no reason to carry around wallets with credit cards and drivers license. Everything would be stored digitally on a nation wide network. Forget about remembering passwords and PIN numbers, your fingerprint will do. No more counting of ballots and debating over “hanging chads,” a digital voting network means results would be totally accurate and updated by the minute. Not only could everything be much easier and streamlined in a world of biometric technologies, but also identity theft would be a thing of the past. Everyone would be totally accountable for their own actions, and their own actions alone. This could send crime rates to an all-time low. There appear to be countless benefits that biometrics can help us achieve. This world would truly be a remarkable one to live in, but many experts agree that it is a naïve world.Biometrics have many hurdles to get by in order to become as present and common as they are in the world described above. Problems that face biometric growth is the fact that the cost of identification devices are, presently, much too high and “people are hesitant to trust giving a ‘piece of themselves’ to a machine” (“Social” 1). Another problem is that biometrics have always been used in the case of criminals, and when we start using these identification technologies on innocent civilians, it gives the innocent civilians a presumption of guilt. Perhaps the strongest argument against implementing biometrics into our everyday lives is that people would have to enter the information into machines, and people make mistakes. In a world where your name would be tied to nothing but your biometric fingerprint, a mix-up could be disastrous and place false guilt on you. Imagine the case of a disgruntled employee at a biometrics database agency. You better hope she doesn’t hold a grudge against you because how hard would it be for her to link your name to the DNA of a convict.A world of biometric saturation, as in a world of extreme surveillance, may not allow us to breathe and be ourselves. We may go through the whole day knowing that the only place that we can truly live, is at home. Corporation will undoubtedly fight for the right to use biometrics to same money and increase security, but will the employees stand for it. These questions will be answered soon enough.

2. Fingerprint Matches Come Under More Fire As Potentially FallibleOctober 7, 2005; Page B1By: Sharon Begley

Fingerprint examiners would probably be happy if they never heard the name "Brandon Mayfield" again, but for researchers who study the scientific basis for fingerprint identification Mr. Mayfield is the gift that keeps on giving.

Mr. Mayfield is the Portland, Ore., lawyer and Muslim convert whose prints the FBI matched to those taken from a suspicious bag near one of the 2004 Madrid train bombings. When Spanish police insisted the prints didn't match Mr. Mayfield's -- and eventually linked them to an Algerian living in Spain -- the FBI conceded the error and apologized to the jailed Mr. Mayfield.

Since such an error is supposed to be impossible (an FBI handbook says, "Of all the methods of identification, fingerprinting alone has proved to be both infallible and feasible"), the case has achieved a certain notoriety. So when scientists recently tested fingerprint IDs, they told examiners one set of prints were from Mr. Mayfield and the other set from the Madrid bombings. "We told them we were trying to understand what went wrong in that case," says Itiel Dror of Britain's University of Southampton, who did the study with student David Charlton. "Could they please look at the prints and tell us where the examiners had gone wrong."

One examiner said he couldn't tell if the pair matched. Three said the pair did not match and helpfully pointed out why. The fifth examiner insisted the prints -- notorious for not matching -- did match.

Give that one a gold star.

Unbeknown to the examiners, the prints were not from Madrid and Mr. Mayfield. They were pairs that each examiner had testified in recent criminal cases came from the same person. The three who told the scientists that their pair didn't match therefore reached a conclusion opposite to the one they had given in court; another expressed uncertainty, whereas in court he had been certain. Prof. Dror will present the study later this month at the Biometrics 2005 meeting in London.

A study this small would hardly show up on scientists' radar screens. But it comes at a time when traditional forensic sciences -- analysis of bite marks, bullets, hair, handwriting and fingerprints -- are facing skepticism over the validity of their core claim: that when two marks are not observably different, they were produced by the same person or thing.

Michael Saks of Arizona State University, Tempe, argues that the claim lacks "theoretical and empirical foundation." There is no basic science that predicts how often marks that match on some number of characteristics actually come from different people, as there is for DNA

typing. And data on the frequency of false matches are sparse.

It isn't just fingerprints. Last month the FBI announced that its lab would no longer try to match bullets by the trace elements they contain. Although the FBI "still firmly supports the scientific foundation of bullet lead analysis," the bureau said, "neither scientists nor bullet manufacturers are able to definitively attest to the significance of an association made between bullets."

That decision may be the first move toward what Prof. Saks calls "the coming paradigm shift in forensic science." For too long, he argues, forensic science has been excused from rigorous research on how frequently attributes (ridges and whorls in fingerprints, trace amounts of tin or antimony in bullets) vary and on the probability that marks with identical attributes come from different people or objects.

In the most serious break with rigorous science, forensic science often regards the very notion of probability as anathema. The International Association for Identification, the largest forensic group, says testifying about "possible, probable or likely identification shall be deemed ... conduct unbecoming." Only 100% certainty will do. The pioneers of DNA typing, in contrast, calculated the probability of false matches, making DNA the most scientific forensic science.

The unsupported, and unscientific, claim of infallibility is being tested in Massachusetts' highest court, which last month heard an appeal on the admissibility of fingerprints. Defense lawyers argued that the technique falls short of the standard the U.S. Supreme Court established in its 1993 "junk science" decision. The decision held that scientific testimony must have a known error rate. It will be interesting to see how much longer fingerprinting can get away with "zero."

What is it if not zero? FBI proficiency exams since 1983 find an error rate of 0.8%. Multiplied by the millions of cases crime labs process, that works out to about 1,900 possible mismatches every year. But misattributions "appear to be occurring at an accelerating rate," says Simon Cole of the University of California, Irvine, who recently compiled 22 cases of mismatches for a study in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. That rise, he suggests, may reflect the fact that examiners are "under greater scrutiny."

According to a 2002 handbook of forensic science, error rates are not what you see on TV. They're as high as 63% for voice ID, 40% for handwriting, 64% for bite marks, 12% for hair. The real numbers may be even higher: Blind tests, slipped into an examiner's workload rather than marked, "Here's the test!", are essentially nonexistent.

3. Identix Website

Identix provides fingerprint, facial and skin biometric technologies, as well as systems, and critical system components that empower the identification of individuals in large-scale ID and ID management programs.

The Company's offerings include live scan systems and services for biometric data capture, mobile systems for on-the-spot ID, and backend standards-based modules and software components for biometric matching and data mining. With a global network of partners, such as leading system integrators, defense prime contractors and OEMs, Identix serves a broad range of markets including government, law enforcement, gaming, finance, travel, transportation, corporate enterprise and healthcare. Identix Incorporated is headquartered in Minnetonka, Minnesota with principal offices in New Jersey, Virginia, California and the United Kingdom. Identix has approximately 500 employees worldwide.

The company was formed in 1982 and went public in 1985. Identix acquired several companies in the mid-1990s and most recently, in 2002, completed a merger with Visionics Corporation, to become the Identix of today.

Biometrics is a group of proven technologies and computerized methods that are able to identify and verify individuals based on physical or behavioral characteristics. They match the patterns of these individuals, in real time, against databases of enrolled records. The main biometric technologies include fingerprint, face, hand geometry, iris, palm, signature, voice and skin.

The match process can be broken down into three steps:1) The image (i.e., fingerprint) is captured; 2) It is converted into a template; 3) Using complex algorithms, the template is matched against a stored record.

Biometric technologies operate in two distinct modes: authentication (one-to-one matching) and identification (one-to-many matching). However, only finger, face and iris biometrics are actually capable of performing one-to-many matching, that is distinguishing a person amongst millions of others.

Identix has chosen to focus on the development of fingerprint, face and skin as they have utility across the broadest range of applications, and can be seamlessly combined through fusion techniques to deliver unparalleled accuracy.

Fingerprint Biometrics

Fingerprint biometrics is based on the distinctive characteristics of the human fingerprint. It is estimated that the chance of two people, including twins, having the exact same fingerprint is less than one in a billion. For decades, fingerprinting has been utilized in booking procedures or conducting criminal investigations.

Today, advanced systems called live scan capture fingerprints without the use of ink. Identix live scan systems contain state of the art optics that capture high quality fingerprints regardless of whether there is dirt, moisture or residue left behind on the platen. There are also less expensive fingerprint scanners that are used for commercial purposes such as computer/network logon and access control.

The Identix BioEngine® algorithm is minutia-based, meaning that it analyzes the fingerprint image for endings, splits and bifurcations in the ridge patterns. Matching two minutia-based templates does not require that all extracted minutiae match. In fact very strong matches can be made even when as few as one third of the total minutiae match. The strength of the BioEngine algorithm comes from its ability to discern fingerprint images over an extended period of time.

Due to the fact that minutia points do not change over time and that not all minutiae must be present in order to verify identity, minutia-based systems are the preferred method underlying most fingerprint biometric systems. For example, cuts and scars may not affect all minutia points and even partial prints left behind at crime scenes may yield sufficient amount of minutia points to run a comparison against a database. One of the largest criminal databases in the world, the FBI’s IAFIS system with over 40 million records, uses minutia-based fingerprint templates. Minutia-based fingerprint systems are also more secure in that they do not rely on a stored fingerprint image for matching, only the minutia template.

Face Biometrics

Since the beginning of time, humans have relied on facial recognition as a way to establish and verify another person’s identity. Facial recognition technology isn’t any different. Using software, a computer is able to locate human faces in images and then match overall facial patterns to records stored in a database.

Traditional facial recognition systems analyze the geometry of the face or the relative distances between predefined features (e.g., nose and mouth) in a process called Local Feature Analysis. Recent discoveries in skin biometrics, however, are adding a new dimension to facial recognition, boosting accuracy by significant levels.

Because the skin biometric uses the same facial images as traditional facial recognition systems, the two can be easily fused together to yield exceptional levels of performance. The combination yields unprecedented levels of accuracy – even able to distinguish between identical twins! Identix FaceIt engine is the only facial recognition technology on the market to take advantage of this breakthrough. No wonder it is the most recognized brand in facial recognition!

Skin Biometrics

Skin is one of the latest and most exciting of technologies in the biometrics family. It is a new technology in the sense that until now, the dermal surface of the skin could not be imaged and classified in an automated manner.

Using an algorithm called surface texture analysis, the surface of the skin is analyzed for random features and a skinprint (skin template) is extracted. The skinprint can be used on its own, or fused together with traditional facial or fingerprint biometric systems to deliver exceptional levels of accuracy and robustness as compared to traditional face and finger recognition applications.

Fusion Biometrics

In many applications of biometric technology, it is possible to apply multiple biometric technologies by collecting samples from different body parts, or applying different algorithms to samples from the same body part in order to increase accuracy.

This general method of improving performance via collection of multiple samples is known as Biometric Fusion, a methodology developed by Identix that combines critical properties from each biometric system to establish the desired False Accept and False Reject Rates.

Traditional methods of combining biometrics are called layering, which uses and/or scenarios. Unlike layering, the fusion approach increases the reliability of decisions made by an identification system, promising to provide increased value for fraud prevention and automated identification applications.

The end result is a system that is applicable to a larger target population and therefore of greater value to biometrics users than the best currently available biometric system on its own. Customers with strong interest in advancements in the field of automated identification can look to biometric fusion as a way of optimizing the use of biometrics for efficiency and accuracy.

4. Biometrics Beyond Prime Time

October 25, 2005By David R. Butcher

Biometrics is no longer such a leading-edge technology as to only appear in such far-fetched circumstances as those found on TV shows such as 24, Alias and CSI. Rather, it is increasingly being incorporated into the real-world enterprise.

Noticing the recent spat of security breaches gaining noticeable attention in mainstream media and across industries, it’s no wonder other security options such as biometrics have of late been receiving similar recognition. There’s good cause for renewed interest in security; for instance, 9.3 million Americans were victims of identity theft in 2004 alone, according to the Identity Theft Survey, Javelin/Better Business Bureau. And this is only one aspect of security.

Enterprise security today is increasingly incorporating biometric identifiers as an additional catalyst for security. In fact, New York City-based consulting firm International Biometric Group reported that the worldwide market for biometric devices grew last year to $1.2 billion, a 67 percent increase.

The use of biometrics, or a method of verifying an individual’s identity based on physical features such as hand shapes, fingerprints or iris patterns, has emerged in part because of a growing awareness that passwords are oft unreliable for security. There are, in general, two types of biometrics: behavioral, which measures a user’s performed activity such as keystroke, signature or voice, among others; and physiological, which examines physical characteristics such as fingerprint, retina, iris, hand, face or DNA, among others. The two most widely used biometrics technologies are fingerprint recognition systems (48 percent) and facial recognition (12 percent).

According to an Oct. 14 Newsday article: “The overall biometrics industry, mostly government and corporate applications, will generate a projected $1.5 billion in revenue worldwide this year and nearly $5.3 billion annually by 2010, said Brian Wong, senior consultant to International Biometric Group.”

The firm’s analysts further estimate an expansion to $4.6 billion by 2008.

Of note, the first-ever one-day international biometrics Web conference, the Biometrics E-Symposium 2005, held on Sept. 28, brought more than 1,500 viewings from 86 countries — both a success and encouragement for those involved in the maturing technology.

Newsday continued, “companies are moving into the consumer market, focusing on fingerprint readers because the components are cheap and small.”

We generally use passwords, passcodes and pin numbers to access a personal computer’s highly confidential data and records; or to access financial accounts at the ATM or to highly vulnerable corporate-enterprise systems; or even to gain entry to or start the car — all of which in turn leaves us with a large pool of passwords, passcodes and pin numbers from which to recall during a particular entry/access transaction. For the security of such highly confidential information, biometrics is more often being used.

Integrating biometrics into an enterprise-environment security system may take time and training, but, according to a Top Tech News story, “it is generally not as tricky as bringing together multiple operating systems or competing software.”

“As biometrics has grown as a field, there’s been an effort on the part of developers to make sure that it integrates with other security technologies,” Top Tech quoted Joseph Kim, associate director of consulting at International Biometric Group. “It’s easier now to put biometrics on top of security than to take out the security and put biometrics in.”

Although, while biometric authentication certainly adds an extra layer of security, as EarthWeb, IT Management noted, “it would be a mistake to implement a high-end system and then feel that break-ins instantly would be consigned to the history books. It takes back-end integration, constant vigilance and consistent user involvement to keep an enterprise secure […] There is little point, then, in adopting a stand-alone biometrics system that cannot easily be assimilated into the organization's existing security fabric.”

Already introduced to the consumer market, IBM advertises in commercials the company's biometric laptop computer that can be accessed by merely swiping your finger. Pantech offers a cell phone in which fingerprints provide secure access and allow speed dialing 10 numbers -- each with a different finger. And Adel and Biocert Guardian locks secure doors with a touch.

Biometric technology also has lately been deployed in application areas such as immigration, ATMs and national identification, the idea being that the security advantage lies in that the personal I.D. cannot be lost, hacked or stolen.

However, as the Associated Press noted on Oct. 11, these implementations are slow in the United States and the United Kingdom, and are mostly taking place in South America (e.g., Chile and Columbia), where “citizens already are accustomed to the use of fingerprints for general identification, such as I.D. cards they carry.” Airports in Canada and the Netherlands also are using systems that scan the iris of the eye to check passengers going through customs, as are border points in the United Arab Emirates to identify fake work visas.

For biometrics in the UK, see the headline of an Oct. 7 Silicon.com article: “Biometrics not ready for prime time, says Europe; Tech too new for large-scale implementations.”

As for the U.S., see again AP’s coverage: “Scanning fingerprints or irises to verify an ATM customer’s identity has yet to penetrate the U.S. banking market because of concerns about expense and privacy.” For now, privacy issues keep biometrics from going full-blown mainstream in the U.S., with some exceptions: finger scans are being used at some grocery stores and locker rentals at airports, train stations and theme parks, as well as the Statue of Liberty. “Biometrics are [sic.] also being used in U.S. airports as part of the ‘Registered Traveler’ program for prescreened flyers,” according to AP.

Like any technology still in its infancy, there are still a number of concerns and imperfections to work out; however, biometrics is no longer such a leading-edge technology as to only appear in such far-fetched circumstances as those found on TV’s 24, Alias and CSI. Today’s systems are developed at least to the point that biometrics can be incorporated into enterprise systems without too much effort. Ignoring the hype, biometrics should probably be seen as the still-flawed-but-promising technology it really is.

5. Cash or plastic? How about fingerprint?

July 20, 2005

By Grace Wong

NEW YORK - Instead of keeping countless cards and pieces of information that verify your identification, soon there may be only one thing you need: yourself.

As identity theft has become the bane of consumers everywhere, technologies aimed at making transactions more secure are gaining ground. Such "biometric technologies" include iris scans, as well as those for fingerprints, palm, skin, voice and face patterns.

"In everyday life, the use of biometrics has been growing," said Philip Youn, a consultant at International Biometric Group.

The underlying strength of biometrics is that it uses patterns that are unique to each individual. Your fingerprints belong to you alone, and unlike that password to your online bank account, you can never lose it.

Where can you see it now?

Retail. Albertson's, the No. 2 supermarket chain, is one of hundreds of retailers testing biometric payment systems that let customers pay for purchases with a mere swipe of a finger.

It works like this: You register your fingerprint and your bank account with a service provider. The main ones are Pay By Touch and BioPay.

When you shop at a participating merchant, you just swipe your finger and the payment is automatically transferred from your bank to the merchant -- you don't have to hand over a card, sign a receipt or punch in a PIN.

Earlier this year, Albertson's joined the Pay By Touch network and is testing the service at four of its stores in the Portland, Oregon area.

"One thing we've heard repeatedly from our customers is that they would like to speed up the checkout process," Albertson's spokeswoman Shannon Bennett said. The feedback has been "very positive" she said, although the company hasn't announced any expansion plans for the program.

So far Pay By Touch is available at 100 to 200 stores while rival BioPay's system can be accessed at 150 locations.

"Biometric payments are the safest because no information is passed to the merchant," said Donita Prakash, vice president of marketing at BioPay.

And because you don't have to present your card at the point of sale, the transaction is faster, Pay By Touch marketing director Shannon Riordan said.

Another selling point: biometrics could offer are instant age verification for alcohol and tobacco sales.

Computers. Getting started with biometrics for your computer is as easy as picking up a product like the Biopod Password Manager produced by APC. The small fingerprint scanning device, which plugs into a USB port, stores all your passwords in your fingerprint.

When you go visit your favorite Web sites -- whether it be Amazon.com or your investment portfolio -- all you have to do is scan your fingerprint.

If you don't want to deal with external hardware, IBM, Toshiba and Compaq all sell notebook models already outfitted with a fingerprint reader.

The price of the Biopod is about $50 while laptops with the device built-in can sell for as little as $1,300.

Travel. If you travel internationally, then soon you'll be carrying some high-tech identification. The Department of State has launched a plan to introduce electronic passports that come with a chip that stores the usual personal information as well as a digital photo which enables biometric comparison through the use of facial recognition technology at international borders.

According to State Department spokeswoman Joanne Moore, the electronic passports are still in test mode, but partial implementation is planned for the fall and full implementation in 2006.

Fundamentally flawed technology?

No biometric technology is 100 percent reliable, and privacy advocates are concerned with another problem -- centralized databases holding huge amounts of personal information.

"Whenever you're collecting uniquely identifiable information that you can't change, that's a very bad idea. It's a honeypot for hackers and attackers," Pam Dixon, executive director of the World Privacy Forum, said.

"Biometric technology would seem like it's a fantastic fix for identity theft, but once the ultimate identifier is stolen, there is no recourse for an individual to prove who they are," she said.

While victims of identity theft can get a new credit card number, change their address and even apply for a new Social Security number, they can't change their DNA.

Furthermore, there are those who just cannot use certain biometric systems, IBG's Youn said, explaining that some people's fingerprints are damaged, and others are born without readable prints -- although this is a small portion of the population.

Representatives from Pay By Touch and BioPay said when it comes to security, users of biometric payment services can relax because both companies don't store pictures of fingerprints. Instead, tiny measurements unique to each finger are recorded as an algorithm. If a hacker breaks into the system, all he or she would find is a number rather than a usable image of a fingerprint, they said.