Biometric presentation attack detection: beyond the visible spectrum

The increased need for unattended authentication in multiple scenarios has motivated a wide deployment of biometric systems in the last few years. This has in turn led to the disclosure of security concerns specifically related to biometric systems. Among them, presentation attacks (PAs, i.e., attempts to log into the system with a fake biometric characteristic or presentation attack instrument) pose a severe threat to the security of the system: any person could eventually fabricate or order a gummy finger or face mask to impersonate someone else. In this context, we present a novel fingerprint presentation attack detection (PAD) scheme based on i) a new capture device able to acquire images within the short wave infrared (SWIR) spectrum, and i i) an in-depth analysis of several state-of-theart techniques based on both handcrafted and deep learning features. The approach is evaluated on a database comprising over 4700 samples, stemming from 562 different subjects and 35 different presentation attack instrument (PAI) species. The results show the soundness of the proposed approach with a detection equal error rate (D-EER) as low as 1.35% even in a realistic scenario where five different PAI species are considered only for testing purposes (i.e., unknown attacks

Deep Learning based Fingerprint Presentation Attack Detection: A Comprehensive Survey

The vulnerabilities of fingerprint authentication systems have raised security concerns when adapting them to highly secure access-control applications. Therefore, Fingerprint Presentation Attack Detection (FPAD) methods are essential for ensuring reliable fingerprint authentication. Owing to the lack of generation capacity of traditional handcrafted based approaches, deep learning-based FPAD has become mainstream and has achieved remarkable performance in the past decade. Existing reviews have focused more on hand-cratfed rather than deep learning-based methods, which are outdated. To stimulate future research, we will concentrate only on recent deep-learning-based FPAD methods. In this paper, we first briefly introduce the most common Presentation Attack Instruments (PAIs) and publicly available fingerprint Presentation Attack (PA) datasets. We then describe the existing deep-learning FPAD by categorizing them into contact, contactless, and smartphone-based approaches. Finally, we conclude the paper by discussing the open challenges at the current stage and emphasizing the potential future perspective.Comment: 29 pages, submitted to ACM computing survey journa

Distinguishing Computer-generated Graphics from Natural Images Based on Sensor Pattern Noise and Deep Learning

Computer-generated graphics (CGs) are images generated by computer software. The~rapid development of computer graphics technologies has made it easier to generate photorealistic computer graphics, and these graphics are quite difficult to distinguish from natural images (NIs) with the naked eye. In this paper, we propose a method based on sensor pattern noise (SPN) and deep learning to distinguish CGs from NIs. Before being fed into our convolutional neural network (CNN)-based model, these images---CGs and NIs---are clipped into image patches. Furthermore, three high-pass filters (HPFs) are used to remove low-frequency signals, which represent the image content. These filters are also used to reveal the residual signal as well as SPN introduced by the digital camera device. Different from the traditional methods of distinguishing CGs from NIs, the proposed method utilizes a five-layer CNN to classify the input image patches. Based on the classification results of the image patches, we deploy a majority vote scheme to obtain the classification results for the full-size images. The~experiments have demonstrated that (1) the proposed method with three HPFs can achieve better results than that with only one HPF or no HPF and that (2) the proposed method with three HPFs achieves 100\% accuracy, although the NIs undergo a JPEG compression with a quality factor of 75.Comment: This paper has been published by Sensors. doi:10.3390/s18041296; Sensors 2018, 18(4), 129