DYNAMIC SIGNATUREVERIFICATION AND THEHBSI MODELPurdue University: Michael Brockly | Stephen ElliottUniversity of Kent: Ric...
RESEARCH QUESTION  • How can the Human-Biometric Sensor    Interaction (HBSI) Model be further updated for    behavioral b...
CURRENT HBSI MODEL
RESPONSIVE  • Currently the model has been created for    physiological biometrics and tested most    extensively with fin...
RELEVANT  • Signing as a proof of identity is no new idea  • Dynamic Signatures can be a strong anti-theft    device
BEHAVIORAL BIOMETRICS  • Signature, keystroke, voice, mouse movement  • Different from physiological biometrics  • Increas...
DYNAMIC SIGNATUREVERIFICATION (DSV)  • Use digitizer to capture interaction  • Common metrics:     - min/max/avg velocity ...
2 DIGITIZERS  • Virtual Ink     - ePad Ink  • Paper and Ink     - ePad
VIRTUAL INK DIGITIZER
VIRTUAL INK FLOWCHART
PAPER AND INK DIGITIZER
PAPER AND INK FLOWCHART
INCORRECT PRESENTATIONS  • Incorrect presentations are errors caused by    the signer at point of transaction  • These err...
DEFECTIVE INTERACTIONS  Signature is deemed incorrect and no signature  channel data is collected  • Pen pressure too ligh...
CONCEALED INTERACTIONS  Signature is deemed incorrect and is not detected  by the system  •   User not satisfied but does ...
FALSE INTERACTIONS  Signature is deemed incorrect or  unrepresentative by the signer with sample points  recorded  • Repet...
CORRECT PRESENTATIONS  • Errors can still occur despite a correct    presentation:     - Failure to Detect     - Failure t...
FAILURE TO DETECT  Occur when the signer has donated a signature  that they have deemed acceptable but is not  detected by...
FAILURE TO PROCESS  Occur when the signature has been deemed  acceptable and detected by the system but not  considered as...
FTP CONTINUED  • Pen pressure is variable and too low in some    areas although though ink (virtual or physical)    is lef...
SUCCESSFULLY PROCESSEDSAMPLE (SPS)  This is the result of a correct presentation that  both the user and biometric system ...
RESULTS  • 10 potential error points in both the paper and    ink system, as well as the virtual ink system  • Paper and I...
REVISED HBSI MODEL
FUTURE WORK  • Data collection to further test this model  • Examination of non-genuine users  • Test with more behavioral...
CONTACT INFORMATION  Michael Brockly  •   Undergraduate Researcher at BSPA Lab  •   mbrockly@purdue.edu  Richard Guest PhD...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

(2011) Dynamic Signature Verification and The HBSI Model

8,416 views

Published on

Presented at The 2011 IEEE International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology (ICCST) conference in Barcelona, Spain. 18-21 Oct. 2011

Published in: Technology, Art & Photos
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
8,416
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
235
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
32
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

(2011) Dynamic Signature Verification and The HBSI Model

  1. 1. DYNAMIC SIGNATUREVERIFICATION AND THEHBSI MODELPurdue University: Michael Brockly | Stephen ElliottUniversity of Kent: Richard Guest | James Scott
  2. 2. RESEARCH QUESTION • How can the Human-Biometric Sensor Interaction (HBSI) Model be further updated for behavioral biometrics? • Can this be done for behavioral biometrics, especially dynamic signature verification?
  3. 3. CURRENT HBSI MODEL
  4. 4. RESPONSIVE • Currently the model has been created for physiological biometrics and tested most extensively with fingerprint. • As behavioral biometrics become more trusted, the HBSI model needs to stay current.
  5. 5. RELEVANT • Signing as a proof of identity is no new idea • Dynamic Signatures can be a strong anti-theft device
  6. 6. BEHAVIORAL BIOMETRICS • Signature, keystroke, voice, mouse movement • Different from physiological biometrics • Increase in variability
  7. 7. DYNAMIC SIGNATUREVERIFICATION (DSV) • Use digitizer to capture interaction • Common metrics: - min/max/avg velocity - in both x and y dimensions - pen up / pen down time - size of signature - total pen distance - more
  8. 8. 2 DIGITIZERS • Virtual Ink - ePad Ink • Paper and Ink - ePad
  9. 9. VIRTUAL INK DIGITIZER
  10. 10. VIRTUAL INK FLOWCHART
  11. 11. PAPER AND INK DIGITIZER
  12. 12. PAPER AND INK FLOWCHART
  13. 13. INCORRECT PRESENTATIONS • Incorrect presentations are errors caused by the signer at point of transaction • These errors include: - Defective Interactions - Concealed Interactions - False Interactions
  14. 14. DEFECTIVE INTERACTIONS Signature is deemed incorrect and no signature channel data is collected • Pen pressure too light at all sample points in paper and ink system • No virtual ink is presented as feedback to the signer in a virtual ink system • Latency or temporal error causes data to not be recorded • User abandons process before data is collected
  15. 15. CONCEALED INTERACTIONS Signature is deemed incorrect and is not detected by the system • User not satisfied but does not abandon • Signature not captured due to latency • Signature out of bounds • Pen pressure or ink dispersal incorrect
  16. 16. FALSE INTERACTIONS Signature is deemed incorrect or unrepresentative by the signer with sample points recorded • Repetitive motion due to faulty ink flow or varying pressure • Repetitive motion due to errors by the signer • Incomplete/unrepresentative signature due to bodily movements • Pen interface issues
  17. 17. CORRECT PRESENTATIONS • Errors can still occur despite a correct presentation: - Failure to Detect - Failure to Process • If no errors occur: - Successfully Processed Sample
  18. 18. FAILURE TO DETECT Occur when the signer has donated a signature that they have deemed acceptable but is not detected by the biometric system • Pen pressure is too light across all sample points even though ink (virtual or physical) is left on the surface/digitizer • No samples are recorded due to latency
  19. 19. FAILURE TO PROCESS Occur when the signature has been deemed acceptable and detected by the system but not considered as an accurate representation • Latency or other temporal errors result in partially captured signature • Start and/or end segments are missing • Part of signature it outside capture area - Occurs if boundary areas are not defined • Pen pressure is too light across all sample points even though ink (virtual or physical) is left on the surface/digitizer
  20. 20. FTP CONTINUED • Pen pressure is variable and too low in some areas although though ink (virtual or physical) is left on the surface/digitizer • Pen malfunction causes channel data disruption - Barrel button pressed during donation • System performance fails to capture certain parts of a signature - Machine with too low of free memory
  21. 21. SUCCESSFULLY PROCESSEDSAMPLE (SPS) This is the result of a correct presentation that both the user and biometric system have deemed correct
  22. 22. RESULTS • 10 potential error points in both the paper and ink system, as well as the virtual ink system • Paper and Ink System - Potential for 1 FTD, 3 FTP, 4 FI, 3 CI, and 1 DI • Virtual Ink System - Potential for 1 FTD, 2 FTP, 6 FI, 6 CI, and 1 DI
  23. 23. REVISED HBSI MODEL
  24. 24. FUTURE WORK • Data collection to further test this model • Examination of non-genuine users • Test with more behavioral biometrics - Voice, keystroke, etc.
  25. 25. CONTACT INFORMATION Michael Brockly • Undergraduate Researcher at BSPA Lab • mbrockly@purdue.edu Richard Guest PhD • Senior Lecturer at University of Kent • r.m.guest@kent.ac.uk Stephen Elliott PhD • Associate Professor at BSPA Lab • elliott@purdue.edu James Scott • Graduate Researcher at University of Kent • jas63@kent.ac.uk

×