The article provide an comparative analysis of evolution of basic and additional security features in ordinary passports, during the last two decades from 1996 to 2016, based on the information held in the Keesing Reference database.

1. Trends in the last two decades
Basic & additional security features from 1996-2016
We have investigated the evolution of basic and additional security features in ordinary passports, during the last two decades
from 1996 to 2016, based on the information held in the Keesing Reference database. A number of interesting findings can be
concluded, some of which we would like to share with you.
n 1980 the International Civil Aviation
IOrganisation (ICAO) set the standard
in a document outlining the
fundamentals of the present passport
blueprint with machine readable data. This
document which has evolved over the
years, is known as ICAO Doc 9303 and
contains a list of security standards for
machine readable travel documents that
issuing States may incorporate. The list
distinguishes between the so-called basic
and additional security features, and
issuing States are recommended to
incorporate all the basic, essential, features
and select a few of the additional non-
essentialones.
The main focus of this report is
concentrated within the following areas,
namely: Data page substrate, See through
register, Personalisation techniques, Photo
techniques, Multiple portrait images,
Optical variable features, Chip
implementation and First line features in
general.
Non paper
19%
Paper
81%
Passports issued between
1996-2005
Non paper
27%
Paper
73%
Passports issued between
2006-2016
Data page substrateData page substrate
Passports issued between
1996-2005
Passports issued between
2006-2016
See-through register
Passports issued between
2006-2016
Contains a
see-through register
9%
Contains a
see-through register
20%
Does not contain a
see-through register
91%
Does not contain a
see-through register
80%
Figure.1
Figure.2
Michael has accumulated extensive
knowledge of ID documents. He is an
expert in the field of ID document
authentication. For many years, he has
worked in government positions at the
Dutch Immigration Office and the Forgery
Department at Schiphol Airport. Michael
has built a strong expertise in the
investigation of document fraud at
borders, especially fraud cases concerning
travelers crossing borders.
The past years, Michael has worked as an
International Document Trainer at the
Expertise Centre Identity Fraud and
Documents (ECID), sharing his knowledge
by providing ID Document Authentication
training for, among others, embassies,
consulates, airlines, security agencies,
immigration offices and police
departments all over the globe.
In 2014, Michael launched the ID
Academy together with his document
expert colleagues. The ID Academy is a
knowledge and education centre
providing in-depth and valuable
information on ID documents, document
verification, design and development,
testing, security features, printing
techniques and fraud prevention.
Michael van Gestel
Michael van Gestel works as a
Supervisor Content Management /
Document Expert at
Keesing Technologies.
EXPERT’S VIEW
3

2. 4
EXPERT’S VIEW
Paperversusnon-paperdatapage
Looking at data page substrates, in
particular that of paper versus non-paper, a
clear shift can be noted. Two decades ago
paper represented approximately 80% and
non-paper 20% of the data page substrate.
In the last decade, paper has decreased in
excess of 70% and non-paper has increased
by almost 30%, a nearly 10% growth of
non-paper(seefigure1).
See-throughregister
Just under 10% of passports from 1996 to
2005 contain a see-through register. From
2006 to 2016 this has increased to 20%,
showing an overall growth of 10% (figure
2).Although in the last decade the presence
of see-through register in passports has
grown in popularity, compared to
banknotes during the same period a stark
contrast can be observed. See-through
register is present in 68% of all banknotes
withinour referencedatabase(figure3).
It is peculiar to say the least that See-
through register is present in most
banknotes whereas this is not the case in
passports. A simple clarification might be
that a passport is a multi-page document
and hence this fact could pose a deterrent
for issuers to implement this feature in their
document. However this simple but strong
feature is of course just as effective for
passports asitisfor banknotes.
Personalisationtechniques
Personalisation techniques were quite
diverse between 96-05 with the biggest
three chunks of pie being claimed by Inkjet
printing with an impressive 34%, followed
by Laser printing with 23%, and finally
Laser engraving with 13% (figure 4).
Between 06-16 this pie has shrunk slightly
in diversity and the top three showed the
following division; Inkjet printing 46%,
Laser engraving 28% and Laser printing
16% (figure 5). Of course the correlation
between growth in non-paper datapages
can be tied with the growth percentage of
Laser engraving. However it is rather
surprising to discover that despite the rapid
See-through registerSee-through register
Contains a
see-through register
68%
Does not contain a
see-through register
32%
Banknotes issued between 2006-2016
Laser engraving
13%
Hand
8%
Dot matrix
3%
Other
10%
Thermal transfer
9%
Laser print
23%
Inkjet print
34%
Passports issued between 1996-2005
Personalisation techniques
Laser engraving
28%
Hand
1%
Thermal
transfer
3%
Laser print
16%
Inkjet print
46%
Passports issued between 2006-2016
Other
6%
Personalisation techniques
Figure.3
Figure.4
Figure.5

3. technological advancement of the last two
decades, the most popular personalization
technique is still inkjet. And that in the last
decade this technique has increased even
further to an impressive 46%. In this period
the shift goes even further as we can observe
that Dotmatrix had lost ground altogether
and Thermal transfer underwent a
substantialdecreasefrom9to3%(figure6).
Phototechniques
The period 96-05 saw a pie chart division of
five, with the top 3 being, Inkjet with 34%,
Laser 23% and Laser engraving 13% (figure
7). From 06-16 Inkjet has grown to 47%,
Laser engraving 28% and Laser printing
r e d u c e d t o 1 6 % , t o g e t h e r w i t h
Conventional that went from a 17 to 2%
decrease (figure 8 and 9). From the
perspective of a verification controller the
conventional method is of course the most
fail proof way of cross-checking a photo
with a subject ís features, primarily due to
the fact that an original photo is most
pristine and clear and an inkjet reproduction
of an original photo is simply qualitatively
less sharp and minute details such as for
example a mole could be lost and not clearly
visible. However from the viewpoint of the
document manufacturer, an integrated
photo is naturally more tamper safe than one
which is glued or stapled onto a datapage.A
continuous tug of war dilemma between
oppositeviewpoints.
Passports issued between 1996-2016
Personalisation techniques
9%
3%
23%
16%
34%
47%
13%
28%
8%
1%
3%
0%
10%
6%
Thermal transfer Laser print Inkjet print Laser engraving Hand Dot matrix Other
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
1996-2005 2006-2016
Photo techniques
Laser engraving
13%
Conventional
17%
Other
13%
Laser print
23%
Inkjet print
34%
Passports issued between 1996-2005
Passports issued between 2006-2016
Photo techniques
Laser print
16%
Other
7%
Conventional
2%Laser engraving
28%
Inkjet print
47%
Figure.6
Figure.7
Figure.8
EXPERT’S VIEW
5

4. 6
EXPERT’S VIEW
Multipleportraitimages
Another trend seemingly on the rise is that
of multiple portrait images. Multiple
portraits can be found in numerous forms,
ranging from thumbnail repetition, UV,
microtext, window MLI/CLI to DOVID, to
name a few. Looking at the last two
decades, multiple portrait images have
increased sharply from 20% to 57%, an
impressive 30% (figure 10). Secondary
portrait image is an ICAO Doc 9303
additional feature, hence the rise in
adoption is an interesting observation. A
deeper investigation into the exact
percentages taken up by the different types
of multiple portrait images could be
interestingandnoteworthy.
Opticallyvariablefeatures
Focusing on optical variable features
during 96-16, between VLI, Ink and
DOVID, the biggest growth has clearly
been made by DOVID, an astounding rise
of nearly30% (figure11).
Chipimplementation
In figure 12 we can see an overall sharp rise
of chip implantation in passports, however
it is rather curious to observe that
nevertheless from 2006-2016 still quite a
substantial amount of passports are issued
without a chip. Zooming in further, we can
report that the concentration of passports
issued without chip lies primarily in the
following 3 continents:Asia 28.5%,Africa
27.6% andNorthAmerica22%.
Firstlinefeatures
Finally, we have also looked at the number
of first line features found in the last two
decades. The amount of random features
found on any given data page was on
average 4 in 1996. This amount peaked to
27 in 2011 and this year alone, halfway
through the year, 24 features have been
registered (figure 13). The question
remains is of course with how many
registered features will 2016 close? What
can be concluded is that any given
controller will now need to have the
expertise in excess of 24 features in order to
adequately verify a document sufficiently.
Have the plethora of various features
available in the market near its peak of
saturation, whereby we can ask ourselves
whether the diversity and sheer numbers
are starting to tip the scale negatively and
becomecounterproductive?
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Photo techniques
Laser print Inkjet print Laser engraving Conventional Other
23%
16%
34%
47%
13%
28%
17%
2%
13%
7%
1996-2005 2006-2016
Passports issued between 1996-2016
Passports issued between
1996-2005
Passports issued between
2006-2016
Multiple portrait images
Multiple
portrait images
57%
1 Portrait image
43%
Multiple
portrait images
29%
1 Portrait image
71%
0%
DOVID
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Optically variable features
1996-2005 2006-2016
Passports issued between 1996-2016
Ink Variable Laser Image
41%
55%
6%
15%
60%
89%
Figure.9
Figure.10
Figure.11