Biometrics and Wireless Technologies - Essay Example

Running Head: BIOMETRICS AND WIRELESS TECHNOLOGIES Biometrics and Wireless Technologies of the of the Biometrics and Wireless Technologies Biometrics is the authentication or the identification of individuals based on a physical characteristic or trait. Physical characteristics include fingerprints, facial recognition, hand geometry or iris configuration; and traits include signature formation, keystroke patterns or voice recognition. Biometrics, as something you are, is both more convenient and more secure than something you know (passwords or pieces of personal information) or something you have (card keys, smart cards or tokens). There is no risk of forgetting, losing, copying, loaning, or getting your biometrics stolen, especially if a multi-biometric approach is used for authentication. Dominant security-enhancement technologies leave a lot to be desired. In addition to security risks, has been estimated that between half to a third of calls to IT help desks are password related, and that managing multiple passwords and password resetting costs can range between $200 (Forrester Research estimate) to $340 (Gartner estimate) per employee per year (www.Forrester.com (2005); www.Gartner.com (2005)). Biometrics can offer significant security enhancements as well as other value-added applications. Potential applications of biometric technologies range from controlling physical access to facilities (used by Disneyworld to provide access to season pass holders), enabling voice recognition at call-centers (used by the Home Shopping Network and Charles Schwab to enable hassle-free client authentication), controlling time and attendance of employees (used by McDonalds), providing self-service access to safe deposit vaults at banks (used by the Bank of Hawaii and First Tennessee Bank), or cashing checks in supermarkets (used by Kroger, Food 4 Less and BI-LO). Security concerns and higher levels of fraud, such as the rising incidence of identity theft, combined with advancements in biometric technologies and reducing costs of the technologies involved, have provided an impetus for greater diffusion and highlighted biometrics' immense potential. In 2003, while industry revenues were US$719 million, the estimate for 2004 is US$1.2 billion. This is expected to rise to US$4.6 billion in 2008. Currently the lion's share of biometric technologies is accounted for by fingerprint biometrics at 48 percent, followed by face recognition at 12 percent and hand geometry at 11 percent. Iris recognition, by far the most secure method, has just 9 percent market share, since it costs a lot more to implement and there is a lower level of customer acceptance (International Biometrics Group, 2005). However, the overwhelming majority of current biometrics applications are focused on simply improving security rather than being led by a clear mandate of providing quantum leaps to customer service while simultaneously raising efficiency as well as security. We believe that the winners of tomorrow will be firms that manage to harness the power of biometrics to achieve this essential combination (Wirtz and Heracleous, 2005). Following several industry interview results and other industry participant interactions, the researchers arrived at the conclusion that many, but not all, biometric industry vendors appear to be depending on sales based on "supply push" rather than "demand pull" marketing strategies. That is to say, the biometrics vendors appeared to be captivated with the technology underlying the biometric devices more so than concentrating on current biometric devices as part of a solution to a business problem for prospective customers. However, on the contrary, it was apparent from our conversations with customers and potential customers that they were inclined to be less interested in devices, and more focused on buying solutions to problems. For instance, three prospective customers pointed out that they were "waiting it out" in order to see which technology or vendor would come out as the strongest solution for their problem. A large grocery store chain showed interest in supervising the biometrics industry, without instant plans to purchase a biometric device. (John, 2004) These observations of customers "waiting it out" imply that vendors might have bigger success with a strategy or focus on customer problem resolution at a higher, business strategy and solutions level, as compared to marketing and selling cutting-edge technology devices. From a buyer's viewpoint, the delays or unwillingness in committing to a biometric purchase may also be related to the intricacy of measuring a return from any kind of technology investment. In the technology literature, for instance, there have been discrepancies about measuring the payoff from investments in information technology, mainly in terms of definitions of the independent variable of what forms the return on a technology investment (Fisher, 2001; O'Connell, 2003). We see extensive variation in return on investment assessment tools: MIS budget as a percentage of revenues; information technology (IT) investments per worker; IT expenditures as a percentage of total assets; or even owned versus leased computer ownership (Langenderfer, 2005). One group of researchers recognizes and sets apart 180 different empirical studies on various measures of IT impacts on firm performance (Reuvid, 2005). Over the past few years, businesses have acknowledged that millions of dollars have been squandered pursuing technological dreams that have yet to show results, leaving buyers of biometrics fed-up and cautious about new promises from any kind of technology. *<Tab/>The business solutions issue is further made complex by the deficiency of size and maturity of the biometrics industry, yielding a prospective instability of the vendors as well as the moving target of the constantly evolving and improving technologies. As per O'Connell, (2003) biometrics revenues for 2003, together with law enforcement and AFIS usage, are estimated to be a little over $1 billion. The industry is comparatively small and the amount of dollars available for revenue generation is just not large - at this point in time. It is uncertain if the demand for biometric technologies is as strong as the sanguine inundation of new market entrants might imply. Actually, post-September 11 expenditures for security have augmented by a sheer 4 percent (O'Connell, 2003). Therefore, it is fair to say that the applications of lessons learned from preceding technology implementations imply that to be successful, the use of technology must assist in solving real problems, either from a governmental or business standpoint. From the viewpoint of vendor marketing strategy, acknowledging that customers acquire solutions to business problems is the most essential foundation required for presenting the business case for a biometric solution. On the contrary, our discussion with some vendors selling biometric technologies implies a propensity to recognize the benefits of biometrics on a stand-alone basis without considering whether a biometrics solution makes sense given the fundamental problem, fulfilling the old maxim that "a man with a hammer sees everything as a nail". Nevertheless, for most business problems, we must stress that biometrics are but one solution among several. (Shi, Nan, 2003) For biometrics to vie efficiently in the marketplace, the suggested biometric solution not only needs to provide better performance when compared to biometric alternatives, but must also acknowledge the existence of competition from non-biometric solutions, or alternate goods . Additionally, the cost benefit-analysis and related business case developed to persuade customers of the feasibility of the biometric solution needs to recognize overtly or covertly that customers have choices other than biometrics. Security guards and similar personnel, keys and traditional signatures are some of the oldest methods that attempt to gain access (physical in the case of keys and security persons and logical in the case of signatures). Likewise, photo IDs, passports and other documents such as voter registration cards have been used for years and must be thought of as alternatives to biometric solutions. For a biometric device to be satisfactory, it must do at least as well, or if possible better, than any presently available option (John, 2004). Passwords/PINs are regularly deployed authentication devices for both logical and physical access (e.g. keypads). Handheld tokens and cards in advanced security applications are replacing passwords and PINs because they need the user to present physical proof of entrance authority. Magnetic strip cards are relatively inexpensive, easy to read by low-priced readers and have the capacity to operate in harsh environments. Rugged versions of magnetic cards and readers, for instance, Wiegand, have been produced for external use. Nevertheless, these rugged versions are more expensive and thus allow alternate goods at a equivalent price. (Pagani, 2005) Proximity cards and tokens entail no physical contact between the card and the reader, liberating the individual from having physically to process or carry out any activity to be accepted into the system. Due to efficient operating ranges, physical placement of readers is vital and other objects with magnetic fields can disfigure the signal. Smart cards, including a chip, were developed in the 1970s. A smart card can operate as memory-only or incorporate their own operating system and instruction sets, regarded as processor chip cards. The main opportunity for biometrics is that identifiers are only as strong as the association of the identifying system with the individual and therefore, the shortcoming of any card or token technology is that no guarantee exists that the person identified on the card is the same person presenting the card. Irrespective of the sophistication of the smart card technology, this drawback cannot be done away with. One exception to this observation and one likelihood for smart card technology is the capability to add in both traditional smart card data and a biometric. The marriage of smart card and biometric technologies provides the benefits and expels numerous of the important disadvantages of both technologies. The biometric proves the identity of the person showing the card at the time of access. Biometrics-only deployments need to highlight the valuable advantage, e.g. ease, of not having to carry cards and tokens. (Shi, Nan, 2003) Although not a technical solution, companies manage risk with insurance coverage. Insurance covers a broad range from coverage of specific assets and transactions to umbrella coverage that sits on top of all other insurance policies as a monetary "stop gap". While such coverage provides no security for the assets protected, it does reduce the financial ramifications of physical and logical infringements and when combined with other conventional non-biometric security measures, provides a feasible alternative to biometric solutions. The business case for biometric applications requires a sophisticated array of protection as well as a system that is instinctive, user-friendly, with little or no training combined with low cost. Vendors and prospective customers need to assess how biometrics might be incorporated into their existing operational and planned systems. With current systems, biometric functionality should help the customer improve business processes in a cost-effective manner. (Newell, 2001) One way to illustrate this objective is that the "security is free", meaning that the biometric solution not only provides improved security, but it also does so by improving business processes where the decrease in costs from improved business processes is greater than the cost of the biometrics without bearing in mind improved security. Once the opportunity for biometrics has been examined, the technology should be incorporated into the current processes ably and effectively. Biometric incorporation should be flawless and fairly imperceptible so the users do not end up inconvenienced. As much as possible, customers should take into account limited implementations that will enhance learning before full-scale implementation starts. However, prospective customers have been slow to embrace the biometric technologies, partly due to higher hardware costs, but also because of supposed intrusiveness, fallibility, system intricacy and operational maintenance (Pagani, 2005). Technology is intrinsically privacy neutral and socially apathetic. Nevertheless, the application of the technological solution to real world situation entails choices that have privacy, social and legal implications. Persons deploying biometrics need to be sensitive to these apprehensions and be prepared to address them, as they inescapably will crop up. Users want to understand security regarding their distinctive biometric data and the likelihood of another person using that data. The concern of big brother, where large corporations and big government have superfluous, excess control over a person's individuality and existence, is genuine and challenging. References Retrieved from www.Forrester.com (2005) on April 20, 2006 Retrieved from www.Gartner.com (2005) on April 20, 2006 Wirtz, J., Heracleous, L. (2005), "Biometrics meets services", Harvard Business Review, No.February, pp.48. International Biometrics Group (2005), available at: www.biometricgroup.com (accessed April 20, 2006), John D. Woodward, Jr.Another (2004) View: Who Goes There Biometrics Can Make Positive ID," Government Computer News, July 5, 2004. Fisher, Dennis. (2001) Biometrics is closing in on the enterprise. eWeek, 2001, Vol. 18 Issue 12 O'Connell, Tim. (2003) BIOMETRICS' EMERGING MARKETS. SDM: Security Distributing & Marketing, 2003, Vol. 33 Issue 8 Langenderfer, Jeff; Linnhoff, Stefan. (2005) The Emergence of Biometrics and Its Effect on Consumers. Journal of Consumer Affairs, Vol. 39 Issue 2 Reuvid, Jonathan (2005) Secure Online Business Handbook : E-Commerce, IT Functionality and Business Continuity (3rd Edition) Kogan Page, Limited Newell, Frederick; Lemon, Katherine N. (2001) Wireless Rules : New Marketing Strategies for Customer Relationship Anytime, Anywhere McGraw-Hill Professional Book Group Pagani, Margherita (2005) Mobile and Wireless Systems Beyond 3G: Managing New Business Opportunities IRM Press Shi, Nan Si (2003) Wireless Communications and Mobile Commerce Idea Group Publishing Read More