In Hard Focus

If It's Broken, Fix It

2009-10-26T15:06:00.000-07:00

Just caught this article (via @abc7newsBayArea) that surveillance cameras on more than half of MUNI buses were broken or only "partially operational" as of September 2009.

According to documents that the ABC I-Team received, 22 percent of buses and light rail had no working cameras on board, while 30 percent were listed as only "partially operational."

Yes, MUNI is facing a $129 million deficit heading into the new fiscal year that began July 1, much to do with the many fare cheats costing it $19 million annually, but the buses must have working cameras in order to deal with the violence and fights that break out, like this one on the 20-Columbus. It's obvious just having an empty, inoperable box in buses is just not doing the trick these days.

Podcast with Security Squared!

2009-10-20T10:25:00.001-07:00

Here's a shameless plug here to check out my recent podcast with Steven Titch of Security Squared.

I spoke with Steve for about ten minutes yesterday as a follow-up to our brief meeting at ASIS last month. The podcast addresses the significance of combining NVR, searchable surveillance and cross-platform connectivity, as well as the concept of structured vs. unstructured video.

Steve is an editor and executive producer at Security Squared, a blog that focuses on the convergence of the security industry around access control, IP video and storage, and is an seasoned expert in the industry. Check out the full podcast here.

Underground Trolley Cameras Coming to Beantown, SweeperCams In Nation's Capital

2009-10-19T14:44:00.001-07:00

Some interesting municipal surveillance initiatives over on the East Coast caught my eye recently:

First off, saw a Boston Globe article that the MBTA will begin testing cameras on the underground trolleys as part of a pilot program funded by DHS.

This is an ongoing effort that has already seen success. Three hundred buses and most of the T-subway stations are already equipped with cameras, and transit police have used video in almost 500 investigations, more than 240 of which have resulted in charges. This new program only will enhance the system and add more high-resolution cameras to improve video quality. (These cameras are facial recognition software-friendly and may be used to track people as well).

The video will be streamed in real-time to the Transit Police's operation control center in downtown Boston. According to the article:

"Our hope is that the cameras will be able to be viewed in a police cruiser, so that an officer responding to a call will have real-time viewing of what is happening on the scene," MacMillan said.

While station footage will be stored for almost a month, surveillance video from buses will only be kept for 72 hours. Not sure it's an issue with storage capacity due to high video quality, but a three-day limit severely restricts the video from being used in ongoing investigations, many of which last long past that time frame. However, this is a great effort on the part of the MBTA to take a proactive approach to increase transit security and identify repeat offenders.

Also interesting, I caught an article about D.C.'s Sweepercam implementation, a ticketing camera system installed on the city’s street sweepers to fine cars parked in designated-cleaning areas. The cameras are equipped with license plate recognition software so, should a car be parked in a designated spot, the cameras will note the plate number and the system will send the owners a ticket in the mail.

The system has already had a few hiccups and angered some folks with malfunctioning equipment and/or human error. Many operators have forgotten to turn off the cameras in places not slated for cleaning and thus, photographed legally-parked cars. In an email, DPW spokesperson Nancee Lyons responded to the mishaps:

“The camera may have captured the wrong vehicle, a duplicate ticket may have been issued, the camera may have been triggered accidentally and a ticket may have been issued during a day and hours when there was no street sweeping..."

With possible plans to extend parking meter hours to raise an estimated $9 million in extra funds for the transit system, I'm surprised San Francisco has not picked up on this one yet. DC has already dispensed 22,000 tickets from Sweepercam thus far -- that's good chunk of change that more than covers the investment.

If You Thought Photoshop Was Good...

2009-10-06T10:18:00.000-07:00

Researchers at Tsinghua University and the National University of Singapore presented image processing technology at Siggraph Asia that can create realistic photo composites from a simple sketch. The technology takes a users' rough-labeled drawing of a scene and compares its elements to objects extracted from photos on the Internet. These real-world snippets are then filtered, matched and synthesized Photoshop-style into a single image. And while results vary, they need to be seen to be believed.

Like Microsoft’s Photosynth, PhotoSketch (above) shows how advanced images processing and search algorithms can be used for more than just face-matching and sorting through surveillance footage. For instance, they can also be used to create a photograph of a cheetah chasing a Motocross racer through the desert (skip to 0:14).

No wonder the site seems to be loading awfully slowly and has been down this morning. Sure it's being flooded with those in disbelief.

Security Bloggers Must Disclose Payments & Freebies

2009-10-05T09:58:00.000-07:00

In a 4-0 decision, the FTC announced new rules today that will require all bloggers to disclose any freebies or payments they receive for reviewing or endorsing products.

This decision will be especially important to the security industry with its relatively few analysts and commentators. There is a desperate need for quality, yet unbiased, writing and research in this space -- one where good information can quite literally be the difference between life and death.

The FTC said that violators of the new policy, that goes into effect December 1 of this year, will be subject to fines of up to $11,000...per violation.

However, the commissions did not address how bloggers should disclose such 'conflicts of interest.' To meet the new guidelines, I'd suggest that my security blogging compatriots simply list out the names of any companies or individuals that they have received payments or "freebies" from in the previous 12 months.

----

Steve's paychecks come from 3VR and everyone should know that he is hopeless biased in that area.

Remember To Use Your 'Inside Voice'

2009-10-02T15:50:00.000-07:00

Just caught this article by New Scientist writer, Paul Marks, on an emerging surveillance analysis area seeing some light across the pond. A new group, the Center for Secure Information Technologies (CSIT), has set its sights on improving Britain's existing CCTV infrastructure by monitoring and predicting violent behavior exhibited on the streets and public transportation.

Paul quotes CSIT director Paul Miller in the article:

"Despite massive investment in CCTV, the impact on antisocial and criminal behavior is negligible because very little video is ever analyzed...we're trying to find a set of behavioral events that will allow CCTV to become active and alert operators to potential trouble."

Marks notes different instances -- including people shouting drivers and loitering on the stairs of double decker buses -- that could trigger an alert to notify authorities. Not sure a disgruntled passenger complaining over the $0.50 increase in fares warrants a police alert, but for more threatening and dangerous situations, I can see this being a worthwhile addition to the existing CCTV capabilities.

Another CSIT project of note includes an initiative to try and conceal metal detectors in the bus door frame. I should probably leave my samurai sword at home before hopping on next time.

Check out the article in full here.

CNET Declares Picasa 3.5 Champion of Photo-Editing Facial Recognition Software

2009-10-01T14:20:00.000-07:00

Interesting post from CNET's Josh Lowensohn around a 'Facial Recognition Face-Off' between Google's Picasa 3.5 (just updated last week), Apple's iPhoto (new version released in January), and Windows Live Photo Gallery (updated last June) to determine the best free consumer photo-editing face finder on the market today.

Best part of the testing is that Josh used 500 of his own mugshots in the testing procedures!

Ultimately declaring Picasa 3.5 the cream of the crop, he writes:

"It has, hands-down, the best workflow for finding faces, as well as alerting users to when it had found people in new photos. It's also the only program out of the three we tested that's cross platform, meaning you can use it on either a PC or Mac and have an identical face recognizing experience."

Check out the post in full here -- excellent commentary on the hits and misses of the trials and individual breakdown on each of the three products and their specific features.

Invasion of the Body Bombers

2009-09-29T16:10:00.000-07:00

Just caught this BBC clip on HotAir:

In late August, an Al-Qaeda fugitive pretending to surrender himself to the head of counterterrorism passed through several levels of security inside one of Saudi Arabia’s palaces, and blew himself up via a bomb triggered by mobile phone. How did he get past security? Well, investigators believe he hid the explosives inside his own body. No details on how that came to be.

As terrorism expert, Dr. Peter Neumann acknowledged in the segment, this incident could have tremendous implications on airport security both in the USA and internationally. It's believed that the suicide bomber passed through metal detectors to get into the palace -- and who is to say that someone wouldn't try that at an airport in the near future? While Ed from HotAir points out that triggering a bomb via a mobile phone mid-flight would be difficult due to interference, it wouldn't take long for Al-Queda or similar terrorist group to find a way around this snag.

Just as the TSA has updated its efforts to increase security measures at airports nationwide, it's not surprising to see that terrorists have stepped up their tactics as well. And if we don't step it up, metal detectors could find themselves obsolete if they are unable to notify personnel of the presence of 'body bombers.'

We need to recognize these changing technologies and adapt security procedures and equipment to continue to stay one step ahead and continue to make the safety and security of travelers our first priority.

SFO Receives $5 Million in New Funding for CCTV Equipment

2009-09-29T12:18:00.001-07:00

SFO travelers may see some additional surveillance equipment as they make their ways from curbside to board their flights this holiday season.

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA), last week announced SFO will receive $5 million in additional funding to enhance its existing closed circuit television (CCTV) system to help in 'providing a high level of threat detection and enhancing emergency response and risk mitigation.'

SFO is only one of many airports to receive funding from a $241 million TSA program, which is based on airports' 'critical need to increase operational efficiency, their readiness to begin and complete the project, and the airport's ability to cost share, to use their own funds along with what we provide,' according to TSA spokeswoman Suzanne Trevino.

In addition to SFO, John Wayne Airport, in Orange County will receive $8.8 million for a new baggage system and Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport (DFW) is in line to get $6 million to fund a similar system to that planned at SFO.

As I've written before, with political obstacles and the budgetary limitations that frequently deter airport security initiatives, it's great to see these projects taking shape.

Not sure how long roll-out will take, but something to watch out for with the holiday travel season fast approaching. Santa Claus won't be the only one with his eye out.

Photosynthing Entire Cities

2009-09-18T14:51:00.001-07:00

I have written about Mirosoft's Photosynth before. It's a technology that takes collections of single still image photographs and mashes them together in remarkable ways. From overlapping photos, the 3D structure of an object or building emerges.

Recently, folks used Photosynth to create create a truely amazing view of Obama innauguration.

Now, it is being used to model entire cities!

Face Rec Coming to Chicago Transit

2009-09-17T12:51:00.000-07:00

From Bob Roberts at WBBM:

Pickpockets and muggers beware -- soon, every turnstile at a CTA 'L' station will have airport-style face recognition cameras, and the transit agency is planning much more comprehensive cameras at all 144 of its 'L' stations. [...] CTA President Richard Rodriguez said the agency's goal is to fully outfit all 'L' stations, but said it is dependent on federal funding, and as a result chose the 29 Green and Red Line stations first.

Rodriguez said all of the cameras will be linked not just to the CTA Control Center but to the city's 911 call center and police, as well. At suburban CTA 'L' stations, CTA has established or intends to establish a similar link with local police agencies and Cook County Sheriff's Police.

CTA's board Wednesday approved a $4.3 million contract with Teleste Corp., of Georgetown, Tex., to install the cameras and related equipment. It is financing the high-resolution turnstile cameras, which will be capable of showing facial details, through a $17.9 million U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security grant.

This type of public deployment of facial recognition technology is extremely difficult. So far, 3VR Security is the only organization to come close to providing adequate technology of this task as showcased in its deployment in South Korea.

"As of right now there is no arrest and no anticipated arrest"

2009-09-15T11:18:00.000-07:00

Here's a tragic story hitting headlines everywhere -- however, no stories I've found have seriously discussed the surveillance technology at play nor the length of time this investigation has taken.

Late last week, a Yale pharmacology grad student's body was found hidden in a wall in the basement of a Yale medical research building after she had been missing for almost a week.

However, due to the access control restrictions on the building, investigating officers believe this not to be a random act, but rather one committed by someone in the Yale community. Yale University President Richard Levin was quoted on Monday as saying, "We know everyone that was in the basement. There were limited number of people in the basement and we passed that on to police. There is an abundance of evidence."

And as CNN has reported, security cameras registered Le entering the building, but after searching hours of surveillance tapes, had been unable to find images of her leaving the building. The NY Daily News even reported that more than 100 FBI investigators and three police departments spent over six days pouring through building blueprints and surveillance footage -- and even used bloodhounds to search the building. Six days is a long time.

What does this tragic event teach us? While we await the murder details (expected to be revealed today), the value of using analytics and more sophisticated surveillance tools to search and comb through footage may have reduced the time needed to come to the conclusions we reached in seven days to maybe only a couple of hours. While even the tightest access control restrictions and clearest surveillance cameras cannot prevent a human from taking another's life, technology has the ability to hasten investigations and also equips security personnel with the eyes and ears needed when the human equivalent is not an option.

Using a variety of facial recognition, color tracking and other analytics, we may have been able to identify the student upon entering the building and followed her whenever she appeared on camera. We also could have also identified each person's face that entered and exited the building that evening, as well as tracked articles of clothing by color. We might not have an answer for the cause of such a brutal and senseless attack, but we do know that more stringent access control and surveillance technology may have helped in the investigation process.

Sitting Down with Rajiv Shah

2009-07-30T12:35:00.000-07:00

It has been a busy past few months, but I recently had the opportunity to chat with Rajiv Shah, an adjunct assistant professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and the author of the Smart Cameras blog. Below are some of my answers to his questions around privacy, vendor comparisons, industry connections to academia and the future of the smart camera market.

Again, very excited to share them with the growing IHF readership. Feel free to make comments on any of the responses or questions, and I will be sure to address them.

Also, check out Rajiv's Smart Cameras blog -- it focuses on developments in Chicago's use of video surveillance, as well as other "smart cameras" that utilize additional sensors and/or computer processing techniques. Cool read and a staple on my blogroll.

1. Privacy: What should the industry approach be towards privacy? Should they incorporate features that protect privacy? Should they have default settings that protect privacy or delete information? Or should we not worry about this? Is there a need for an industry-wide approach to this issue?

Conventional wisdom presents ‘privacy vs. security’ as a zero-sum game, one in which gains in one arena necessitate sacrifices in the other. And while there is certainly much truth in this, it is also equally true that in a modern society neither principle can exist without the other. There can be no security without privacy, and no privacy without security.

Today, any meaningful national security failure could create a response that curtails our civil liberties quite broadly. And conversely, next-generation security technologies deployed without adequate privacy and civil liberties protections likely face the crippling backlash of a concerned public. As a result, the security industry needs to take issues of privacy VERY seriously.

For me, an approach to privacy in the context of surveillance starts with a few key principles designed (1) to narrowly tailor a system’s use and (2) to ensure that system access is adequately controlled and audited. Today, conventional “dumb” surveillance systems offer none of these benefits. A large video wall in a security room or command center does nothing to distinguish between security threats and the average person; these systems cast an unnecessarily wide net, relying on human expertise and interest to filter down to focus in on actual security threats.

The issue of what to delete or keep in terms of surveillance becomes much less important on systems where this kind of ‘all-or-nothing’ approach to data access doesn’t exist. For instance, on a 3VR, an investigator might search through many months worth of video information looking for matches or clues relating to the kidnapping of a little girl. However, because this query is done algorithmically using facial recognition, and because the search request is logged and audited, there is ultimately much less concern about the overall retention of video data. The public generally has very little problem with legitimate surveillance investigation that doesn’t subject them to what they feel is needless voyeurism.

Retention of video also becomes less of a concern in the context of new blurring and encryption algorithms designed to protect individual privacy. These new technologies prevent generally tracking and identification of the pubic using surveillance, while preserving the ability of law enforcement and security officials to detect and investigate crime. To better understand what I mean by this, you should take a look at the recent article in New Scientist on some of what we are working on in 3VR labs right now.

In any case, issues of data retention, encryption, access control and the like are often more policy issues than industry issues. Instead, our focus should be enabling decision and policy makers to make, monitor and enforce these choices themselves. Our solutions should present options to do all of this...and more. Today, most security solutions don’t include any privacy protections whatsoever. That needs to change; asking someone to chose between security and privacy isn’t much choice at all.

2. Comparing Vendor Solutions: What can be done to make it simpler for end users to compare and contrast different solutions? It's very confusing now for end users to sort through claims by tens of companies on effectiveness, costs, technology, etc.

Normally, I would say that the answer to this question solely involves the emergence of various standards groups, independent testing and analysis organizations -- that is because the best response to confusion is nearly always more good information. And, I do think there is some good news on the horizon in both of those areas with new security analysts, bloggers and agencies entering the marketplace of ideas every day.

However, because many new solutions’ claims today are so specific and require real-world deployment for actual evaluation, the only way for end-users to fully educate themselves may be through pilot and testing projects that they conduct themselves. New technologies being offered today represent a quantum leap over previous generations of security and surveillance solutions, and end users will ultimately need to make a very significant investment in time and money to educate themselves on their benefits.

3. Connections to Academia: Explain if anything needs to be done to expand the connection between industry and academia. After all, much of the engineering talent has come directly from universities. Are there any suggestions you have for universities and their research?

The disconnect between commercial markets and academia is a classic problem seen across many industries, but I have noticed is a particular problem in the security industry. And as a partial result, there has been comparatively little innovation at the core of this market in recent decades. The surveillance methods used to catch criminals hasn't changed drastically with investigators still found staring at video walls or fast-forwarding through video stores looking for needles in haystacks. Plus, the innovations responsible for rapid productivity gains in knowledge workers in other industry segments seems to have largely passed this industry by. Who are security’s Googles, Microsofts, and Oracles?

To begin to address this issue, I think that most importantly security needs to become the province of innovative and interesting companies again. Only by tackling big, tough and important problems can the security industry hope to lure academia’s best and brightest, or focus them on its problems.

As for universities and their research, there is one problem faced by the security industry today greater than all others…and that is a crisis of our own making. It’s “information overload.” There are quite simply too many cameras and sensors today generating way too much information today, and the resulting torrent of data threatens to overrun our entire industry. Identify ways to process and sort and make meaningful this flood, and you will have done us all a great service…and there is probably a job waiting for you at 3VR, as well.

4. Future Growth of Smart Cameras: Have cameras hit a period of steady growth or do you foresee a potential boom ahead? If so, what are the crucial factors that you see that are limiting growth of that will cause growth to increase? Do we need to improve technology, better end-user experience, etc.

Cameras have seen explosive growth already -- sales worldwide are booming. Not only that, but the general sense of a 'camera' is evolving dramatically; dumb cameras, smart cameras, cameras that record at 200 frames per second, cameras integrated with iPods – they're popping up all over the place and exploding in ways that people could not have anticipated. Not only are the types of cameras available growing exponentially, but the data being collected by cameras has increased by a geometric factor far beyond that. New cameras have higher resolution, higher frame rates. More of just about everything!

As a result, we're stuck drinking from the firehose for the time being. We're inundated with data and have no idea what to do with it due to the sheer volume we're faced with. It's coming in too quickly to comprehend, and as a result, we've discovered that it's not the volume of data you collect, but what you can do with that video (and how quickly) that matters.

The modality of staring at a wall of video screens broadcasting camera streams broke down a long time ago – and we're better off for it. However, as camera volume, quality and speed explodes, we need to figure out how to comprehend and process this volume of data. If we're going to manage the growth of cameras, they don't need to be smarter – we're already capturing more data than we need – but rather more searchable and enable efficient retrieval of vital information.

Face.com Launches New Photo Tagger

2009-07-21T14:11:00.001-07:00

(Photo via ReadWriteWeb)

First Face.com brought us Photo Finder, which started the process of scanning through the 15 billion pictures on Facebook (9,000 images per minute!), and now ReadWriteWeb reports that the company is using the same facial recognition algorithm – the "hybrid descriptor-based funneled" model – to launch Photo Tagger. While very similar in nature to the original Photo Finder, Photo Tagger "...scans through select online albums to automate the tagging process" to speed up the monotonous process of tagging albums. It doesn't matter if the album is yours or a friend's – Photo Tagger will take care of the entire process and save you endless hours of manual tagging.

While I'm not sure how Photo Finder and Photo Tagger differ exactly – of course I have a few ideas – with more and more facial recognition technologies finding their ways to online photo services, I do know it will be tougher and tougher to hide your face online. Bad lighting, odd angling and unfocused photographs look to be no match for Face.com (and the plethora of other photo applications).

3VR Featured in New Scientist!

2009-07-16T15:29:00.000-07:00

This just in! Check out 3VR's image-scrambling technology in the most recent issue of New Scientist out this week.

I spoke with Paul Marks, New Scientist's chief technology correspondent, a little while back around our new method of scrambling CCTV images to preserve the privacy of innocent persons, and he discusses this technology in the issue out this week. Just another example of how we're bringing structure to the world of surveillance to eliminate the 'all-or-nothing' nature of such data collection.

Check out a longer post about the piece on 3VR's blog here.

I Can't Help It -- More iPhone MacRumors

2009-07-10T13:41:00.001-07:00

MacRumors is back at it. Today, they're reporting additional patent filings around object recognition and facial detection extensions, continuing to push forward some of these technologies that I've posted about recently. While these take time to come to fruition, I can't help being excited -- the possible adaptations of these ideas are endless. Let's take a look.

The object recognition capability in which an iPhone would be able to "detect an object via camera, RFID sensor or other means and have their device automatically identify and provide additional information on the object" looks to be potentially quite useful. In the patent background, Apple used the example of an art museum:

"...a user might take a photo of a piece of art and wish to have it automatically identified and additional information on it provided, or engage in an audio tour or podcast and wish to access additional content beyond that provided in the audio files."

Think of all the possible ways to leverage this technology -- other than trying to distinguish between two pieces of art, maybe you can use it to uncover the name of that actress in the recent blockbuster movie that you can't recall but swear looks familiar. Or perhaps you will be able to identify the name of a certain wallpaper color swatch -- and be able to access its brand, serial number and all retail locations withing a five mile radius. Well, both of those might be a bit far off -- not sure the iPhone camera can yet detect the subtle difference between eggshell and off-white or has facial recognition capabilities on par with those of 3VR, but you catch my drift. ZDNet also noted using the technology for price comparisons between retail products.

As far as facial detection developments, it seems that iPhone engineers are indirectly attempting to remedy the device's often woefully poor battery life. New patents look to "determine whether a user is passively interacting with the device" -- meaning not watching the TV show they've downloaded or listening to a song on iTunes -- and if so, turn on a screensaver of some type (similar to the setting on a normal laptop or desktop) to save energy. The iPhone would use its internal camera to detect a user's presence, and while the idea may be antiquated, bringing this technology to a mobile device will be welcomed with open arms.

Are You the Next Susan Boyle?

2009-07-02T14:25:00.000-07:00

MacRumors is leaking information about a few new patents that were recently filed. Intriguing stuff.

I wrote about a patent for a biometric reader to secure Apple devices with either fingerprint or facial recognition, but it looks like Apple will eventually add command functionality from fingerprint patterns.

Want to delete an email? Simply touch your index finger to the screen. Need to compose a new email? Use that pinkie finger. Sick of a song playing in iTunes? Your ring finger can take care of that and seek to the next song. Very cool.

The other patent (related to my previous post) is a RFID reader. As MacRumors divulges:

"Finally, the last notable application covers the dual use of a touch screen as an RFID reader. RFID tags are small circuits that can be embedded in objects for identification using a special reader. Apple suggests that the an RFID antenna can be placed in the touch sensor panel itself, allowing it to also be used as a RFID reader. As RFID tags become more prevalent, this could add a very useful function to future touch screen devices."

There are also rumors of haptic feedback -- essentially, display technologies will allow for tactile feedback from touch screen displays so users can "feel" different surfaces as their finger moves across it. As MacRumors explains, "As an example, a display could include a virtual click wheel which vibrates at a different frequency as the center. Users could easily sense the difference and use the click wheel without having to look at it."

Warm up those pipes, because also in the works a karaoke-like application that provides feedback on tone, pitch and overall quality of singing ability. No need to try out for American Idol anymore -- you'll be able to use iPhone rather than audition in front of Simon Cowell to know you're no Susan Boyle.

Life Without a Mobile Phone?

2009-06-26T15:42:00.000-07:00

I depend on my iPhone as much as the next person -- perhaps even more so.

While smartphones are enabling more and more people to access email and YouTube videos on-the-go, shop online while waiting in line and even check an account balance to ensure it's not overdrawn, Ericcson is confident that phones will soon be able to do much more.

Reported in an article on ZDNet this week, Ericsson's vice president of systems architecture, Håkan Djuphammar, recently predicted:

"A year from now, basically every new phone sold will have [near field communication]. It's a two-way, bio-directional RFID communication link that makes this device work as a tag or reader."

What does that mean? In basic terms, phones will become your go-to for even more basic tasks as we look forward into 2010 and beyond.

Keys? Check.

Credit card number? Check

Concert ticket? Check.

According to the article, "Djuphammar said credit card companies could make use of mobile user location data and IP mapping to ascertain whether a transaction is taking place in the vicinity of the official card holder, thereby judging whether the transaction is likely to be genuine or not."

While this may seem like a win-win for all parties involved, I'm still a bit wearisome about the potential havoc a lost phone may wreak on a customer. With such valuable information all stored in one small device, restrictions must be put in place to secure such data in the instance a phone is lost or stolen.

What's life without a mobile phone? Not sure I want to find out, particularly if Djuphammar's prediction becomes reality.

ePassports get Floating Heads

2009-06-19T08:55:00.000-07:00

Here is the first video that I have seen of Samsung's new ePassport prototype. It features a small back-lit screen as part of the ID card that, in this case, can be seen displaying a semi-creepy floating head. Encoding of this kind or "3D" or multi-image biometric information would go a long way to eliminate problems like those recently seen at Manchester airport.

I want one.

Retail Crime Increases in 2009, According to Recent NRF Study

2009-06-16T13:30:00.000-07:00

Interesting study out of the National Retail Federation today reporting that 92% of retailers were affected by organized retail crime (ORC or "mega-shoplifting") in the past year. This is 8% higher than last year, contributing to the estimated $30 billion that ORC costs retailers every year.

The survey included retailers across industries, from grocery to restaurants and department stores. Security executives from 115 organizations participated, with 73 percent claiming that retail crime activity has increased over 2008.

In an interview with Security Director News' Rhianna Daniels, Tod Cohen, vice president and deputy general counsel for government relations at eBay, had some interesting things to say on reasons behind the increase and why retailers are continuing to struggle to prevent basic retail theft, also arguing against the hypothesis that Web shopping has spurred theft:

"...faced with challenging economic times, some retail giants have made a number of decisions that they were aware would contribute to their theft losses, including cuts in loss prevention staff and tools, as well as major reductions in sales staff, who serve as a powerful deterrent to potential thieves. They also continue to have major problems in dealing with the number one cause of inventory shrinkage -- employee theft. Retailers that are truly serious about this problem must invest resources to attack the problem at its source."

Obviously, retailers have specific security needs and require video surveillance features specifically tailored to their individual concerns -- for example, people counting capabilities and sophisticated object tracking. These statistics reaffirm my belief that investment in intelligent searchable video surveillance tools is crucial for retailers seeking to more efficiently combat fraud and organized crime, and here at 3VR we are now offering such tools and capabilities on all of our SmartRecorders.

With the slow economy taking a toll on profits while spurring a spike in crime, there is no better time to invest in a solution that has the ability to integrate with critical retail systems like POS and access control, while greatly increasing visibility and control for security personnel.

For more info on our retail-specific features, go here. Also check out how Sammy's Woodfired Pizza is using 3VR to bolster its retail security, customer service and loss prevention capabilities.

Sitting Down with Rob Jenkins

2009-06-02T10:35:00.000-07:00

I recently connected with Rob Jenkins, a lecturer at the University at Glasgow and leading authority of facial recognition technology in the UK, to pick his brain about different topics in facial recognition, namely airport security, the future of biometric technology and privacy/related concerns.

Rob had some very insightful, innovative answers to my questions, and I'm excited to share them with the growing IHF readership. Going forward, I'm hoping to have other thought leaders and readers contribute content and commentary to this blog, as I'd like to make this more of a forum for biometric, facial recognition and other technology discussions rather than a one-sided conversation. Feel free to make comments on any of the responses or questions, and I will be sure to address them!

Also, check out Rob's departmental Web site for selected publications on gaze perception and other facial identification topics. Very interesting stuff.

In response to Manchester Airport lowering their matching thresholds, The Telegraph quoted you saying that lowering the passport match level to 30 percent would make the system almost worthless. Another perspective is that the previous levels were causing horrendous queues and customer dissatisfaction. Is there a middle ground here?

There is certainly a middle ground in the sense that we can choose where to strike a balance between rejecting genuine matches and accepting false matches. But reducing either type of error generally increases the other, so it’s a trade-off. There is no ‘sweet spot’ where both types of error are reined in.

Despite the advanced nature of this technology, do you believe that there should still be a human element involved in security checks? If so, do you believe we will ever reach a point where this will no longer be necessary?

The main problem with referring the difficult cases to humans is that humans cannot do the task reliably either - even if we’re trained and experienced. Humans are fantastic at matching familiar faces, but our performance with unfamiliar faces is very poor. If we can somehow incorporate the benefits of familiarity into the technology, then it could be transformed.

Facial recognition technologies are popping up all over -- club entrances, bathroom faucets, online photo services, using cameras in lieu of passwords to access computers -- have they hit the tipping point? Is it only time before we use the technology to unlock our front doors and open our car trunks? What trajectory do you see it taking? Staying in security-based deployments, infiltrating everyday life or a balance between the two?

To some extent I think a tipping point is being ushered in, mostly by people who have something to sell. And it is an idea that some sectors are keen to buy into. So in that sense there is a lot of good will wishing the technology to work. I don’t find the gadget market especially troubling, provided that errors are of relatively little consequence. The real danger is in rushing to large-scale security deployments. For applications such as passport control or forensic face recognition the stakes can be much higher, and we know that the available technology is not yet up to the task.

In the same vein, has facial recognition reached a point where accuracy and reliability now line up with the media's expectations?

In my experience, identification errors tend not to go down well with the public. I often ask audiences how often they would be prepared to be the subject of a misidentification. The answers are in the order of once a decade, even when the imagined consequences are minor. That’s a tall order, given the number of identity checks that some proposals entail. It comes as something of a shock when these demands are compared against current capability. As far as media expectations are concerned, I think there has been a change in tone. Traditionally, the emphasis has been on the implications face recognition for privacy, with the unspoken assumption that it is reliable. These days there is more of an awareness that the technology simply is being phased in, whether it works or not. That changes the focus of the debate.

The "Big Brother" argument -- that citizens are losing their individual privacy rights due to increased public security efforts -- is always present in a discussion about surveillance. Is there a point at which facial recognition and biometric technology infringe on personal freedoms and the right to privacy? Is blurring faces enough? Are there places where surveillance should not be allowed?

I don’t think facial recognition and biometric technology necessarily infringe on privacy. It is certainly possible to imagine applications where privacy concerns don’t arise. However, for the security and surveillance applications that have been at the forefront of public discussion, the tension with privacy is fundamental. The whole purpose of identifying someone is to connect them with some other information, and the nature of that information is a major issue. We can think of face recognition as a key to identity. But focusing on the key tends to distract us from other questions, like What’s behind the lock? As more and more information is stored behind the lock, the reliability of the key becomes increasingly important. As does the question of who has access to the key.

The practice of blurring or pixellating faces to protect identity (as in Google Streetview) is often poorly informed. Although such manipulations can make it more difficult for observers to identify people, this is only the case when the observer is unfamiliar with the faces concerned. When the observer is familiar with the face, blurring or pixellating the image does surprisingly little to impede identification.

People have very different ideas about where surveillance should be allowed, and which places should be out of bounds. I don’t really foresee any wide agreement on the extent of coverage that is desirable or acceptable. The general trend is for rapid expansion, especially in the US and the UK, but my impression is that this trend is not driven by public demand.

The UK has over 4 million cameras -- that's one for every 14 people in the country and 200,000 in London alone. Chicago is working to improve its 'Virtual Shield' and include the entire metropolitan area in its surveillance grid to cut down crime. Yet, criminals still often get away with murder -- literally. Are expectations set too high? Are surveillance grids more of a scare tactic in preventing crime from happening rather than proactive in catching criminals in the act?

It has been known for some time that the unprecedented CCTV coverage in the UK has had little or no effect on crime rates. A recent Home Office report revealed that only 3% of crimes were solved using CCTV footage, and suggests that simple improvements to street lighting would be more effective. Part of the problem is that it is unrealistic for police to monitor CCTV footage on the scale that it is produced. But more importantly, little thought has gone into the use of CCTV evidence in court. It has only recently become clear how poor humans are at matching unfamiliar faces, even when the images are far higher quality than could be obtained from CCTV. We’ve already looked at machine performance in this context. Establishing a match that will stand up in court is very difficult indeed.

The deterrent argument is interesting because the figures imply little or no deterrent value in CCTV. The standard explanation for this is that people assume the cameras are not working, which is a reasonable inference to make if they are not reducing crime. However, I wonder if there is also a paradoxical effect of increasing coverage. After all, the more cameras there are, the less likely it is that any particular camera is being monitored.

3D Chip Company Creates Gesture Video Interface

2009-06-02T06:54:00.000-07:00

I looked at this company, Canesta, and a competing company, 3DV, a few years back. (3DV was recently acquired by Microsoft.) Both companies use special 3D sensors to cleanly and perfectly track objects that are relatively close by. Unlike conventional video analytics that must use computationally expensive algorithms to track and extract objects from video feeds, these companies use rays of light to directly measure those object. The result is pretty cool. Here is what that looks like:

Canesta recently released the following demonstration of their technology tied into what looks like the user interface from Cooliris:

Microsoft also announced its own gesture control system called Project Natal at E3. The interface is no doubt based on the new technology they acquired from 3DV.

So, why am I writing about this here? Well, the mass production of these kinds of 3D sensors holds significant potential to shape and change the biometrics and video analytics industries as we know them. For instance, complicated algorithms designed to extract and identify faces from video might not be needed if the camera chip itself was already producing perfectly accurate measurements of the faces crossing it’s path. Similarly, 3D video cameras might obviate the need for expensive video analytic software.

For now, however, there is a problem with that prediction. The range of these sensors is just not quite long enough to be used in any kind of surveillance context. Today, one really needs to be standing quite close for the 3D analysis to work.

But, like all things in the world of technology...that will change.

US/Canada Radio Frequency IDs Set to Go Live

2009-05-29T06:34:00.000-07:00

A lot of outlets are covering this piece of news, Homeland Security to scan fingerprints of travelers exiting the US, but I think a far more interesting tidbit is buried deep in the story:

The DHS is also set to go-live with a trial of RF-enabled biometric identity cards on June 1, aimed at securing the border between the United States and Canada.

[...]

As of June 1, travelers crossing the border will be asked to carry an RF-enabled card which transmits a passport photo image and information about the traveler to border control staff systems, who can then check that photograph against the physical appearance of the traveler or their vehicle.

I think this is a sign of what's to come at the border. For now, these kinds of trials will likely remain limited. Also, given recent problems with more automated verification programs, like in Manchester, these trials will almost certainly require a good deal of manual monitoring and human review for the foreseeable future.

Police Slog Through Party Pics to Solve Case

2009-05-28T22:05:00.001-07:00

I am not sure which will be the bigger crimefighting tool in the end. 3VR? Or, Twitter?

(Don't) Say Cheese

2009-05-28T13:25:00.000-07:00

Looks like the Hoosier state is quite a trend setter in facial verification technology these days. Back in December, I wrote about Indiana's Bureau of Motor Vehicles restricting scarves, hats and glasses, but the one prohibited 'accessory' that drew the most attention was none other than a teethy grin!

Now, three other states are following suit as researchers have concluded smiles inhibit the technology from accurate identifications, and more 'neutral' expressions are much more conducive to proper authentication.

Arkansas, Nevada and Virginia are all installing systems similar to that of Indiana's BMV and will compare new driver photos with those already existing in the database. If there happens to be a match -- which indicates attempted identity fraud -- department personnel will be immediately notified.

While computerized matching isn't an entirely new venture (31 other states already do it, including Texas and Oregon, and other states like California are well on their way), the regulation on smiles is a step in a new direction.

Despite drawing a few red flags, this type of preventative measure -- using technology to cut down on identity theft and fraud -- is an improvement for all parties concerned. As the article states, Illinois alone has stopped 6,000 attempted fraud cases since first installing the system a decade ago, and with numbers like that, it isn't far-fetched to say the main benefactor of this new technology is the driver!

However, for everyone to realize the advantages derived in such widespread initiatives -- I'm not referencing only DMV deployments, but also public surveillance grids and the like -- program goals and purposes must be explained to the public to ensure their understanding. People will always be resistant to silly or needless rules, so they need to be informed that new developments are being put in place to benefit them! Plus, even though they are nearly always awful, the license mugshot has an undeniable place in American culture and may cause quite the uproar considering the limited number of laughs a 'neutral' face can garner.

Smiles or no smiles isn't what matters -- it's the consistency of the pictures that is at the heart of the issue. While choosing a “neutral” expression probably makes the most practical sense, perhaps we can rise up in revolt and demand that our smiles become the norm if we feel strongly enough! The request might be more difficult to satisfy technologically, but a happy-looking driver may make the DMV a bit more bearable for the semi-annual visit many often make.

There is also more advanced technology out there today that might make this debacle less painful -- just think of that "smile detection" feature on most digital cameras on the market. Using it in reverse and adding on other filters designed to weed out squinting or general silly, odd, or bad poses or expressions, dare I say it might make it possible for the entire American driver population to have a half-decent license photo and one that is immune to identity fraud?

Looks like we're headed in that direction.