While biometrics are by no means a new technology to the security industry, their evolution in regards to price and end-user acceptance means their viability may be at an all-time high.
In this exclusive Industry Influencer Q&A sponsored by Suprema, Bob McKee, President of Suprema America, discusses these trends and their potential impact on security integrators. Suprema is a global provider of access control, time & attendance and biometrics solutions.
From the cost and deployment perspectives, in what ways have biometrics for access control become a more viable option for end-users than in the past?
McKee: Today, there are more end-users using biometrics than ever, because Apple and Samsung implemented biometrics on their phones and users
immediately gravitated to them for their efficiency and simplicity. Before that, biometrics were already in use for various industries. In the security industry the primary use was in high-security areas vs. general access.
All that said, the two barriers to wide adoption in the security industry have always been price and throughput. No one wants to wait at a door to be identified. When weighing the cost between utilizing RFID at the door or implementing biometrics for general throughput, the use of a non-biometric reader at the door usually prevailed due to cost and lack of awareness of the technology.
This is still the case when looking at usage reports between RFID technology and biometric deployments. What is trackable is that biometrics are now used for identity in lots of other industries and services. For instance, CLEAR, using biometric technology, is now available at TSA allowing the average consumer to save time getting through airport security.
In fact, efficiency is a primary driver for implementing biometric technology. You will notice that even TSA PreCheck lines are getting longer because people hate waiting in regular TSA lines. Now, many are turning to CLEAR because registering your identity is an easy process for verification and validation – and it leads to being escorted to the front of the line.
Additionally, the throughput barrier has come down because Apple, Samsung and other mobile companies around the world have been deploying biometrics on phones. This is causing the cost of biometrics to trend down. Additionally, Access Control Manufacturers (ACMs) are using biometrics on the phone for verification vs. standard RFID. This a nice complement to the digital credential deployment of using NFC or BLE when higher security standards are needed.
The COVID and post-COVID era created an environment where “contactless” technology became a critical offering for companies seeking for consideration for greenfield projects. Now, a more conscious decision and evaluation of the use of biometrics has become a more frequent conversation in meetings. Price decrease and increased throughput are removing barriers for biometric deployments and increasing safety across the board.
Are end-users becoming more accustomed to and accepting of the use of biometrics for access control?
I remember an owner/operator of a very large multi-tenant building in New York, who told me the primary reason they were looking to upgrade their facility with biometrics was that a key executive asked: “Why can’t I get into the building just using biometrics? After I get home from long work trips, I sometimes can’t find my security credentials, but I always know where I am!”
He laughed retelling this story, but it is a real-world user experience due to the deployment in everyday use of biometrics on phones. The more educated users become on biometrics, the more they expect it in everyday life. Additionally, biometrics is even a cost-cutting measure. The incremental cost of lost or stolen credentials over a five-year period is not negligible, and biometrics eliminate the need for that entirely.
What is the difference between an open biometric environment and a compliant environment, and which is the preferred method for security applications?
Facial verification is the compliant environment; facial recognition is considered an open environment.
In access control scenarios, users are informed of the purpose of the use of their face as a means of accessing a controlled portal or data. This is an example of user opt-in and is a compliant use. An example of an open environment is in the safety and security of people and assets.
With the use of AI, there are many good reasons for facial recognition, or an open biometric environment – including scanning for known criminals in airports and stadiums or viewing people traffic in fast food chains for operational efficiencies. However, with the increased use of camera analytics, the applications have changed, and users are becoming more concerned about their privacy.
Using a person’s identity without their consent can be a real issue. This is one reason that GDPR was implemented in Europe for facial recognition, which now affects U.S. companies.
What are the most effective biometric methods when it comes to physical access control specifically?
It really depends on the use-case. The use of biometrics, the individual project budget, and the level of secure identity will dictate what method should be deployed. In the U.S., we are seeing many data centers using fingerprint technology for accessing secure data. Also, many companies are using fingerprint technology for time-and-attendance applications.
A big push for facial verification is being used in combination with turnstiles for high throughput. High-security environments are asking for multi-modal biometrics. In the government market, the use of three-factor authentication (credential, PIN and biometric) is required for many projects.
Effective methods will come with varying degrees of use, performance, and budget.
What are the most important things that integrators should be cognizant of when it comes to installing and integrating biometrics into an existing system?
Integrators should initially focus on selecting a biometric manufacturer with a proven track record, including security compliance and certifications. They should also look for how the devices communicate with their existing or planned platform and with ACM panels.
Ask questions like: “Do they use standard communication methods like RS-485, Wiegand, OSDP to control panels” and “How does the enrollment software from the biometric manufacturer communicate with the ACM’s platform – is it an on-premise enrollment server or is it integrated with ACM software (Including in the cloud)?”
Finally, ask if the biometric manufacturer provides training and services in the markets you serve. From there, you should be able to identify the correct biometric manufacturer for you.
