Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology

3D Holograms Detect Fake Signatures 196

Posted by michael from the chicken-scratches dept.
Roland Piquepaille writes "Several sources reported last week that a new technique that produces 3D holograms of handwriting could be used to detect fake signatures on checks, credit card receipts or other important handwritten documents. Here are pointers to Nature, Scientific American or BBC News Online. Instead of using 2D techniques to look at the sequence of pen strokes in a signature, this new method is based on 3D micro-profilometry which permits to translate the writing into an image showing dips and furrows of the sample so that anomalies can be detected. If you plan to imitate your spouse's signature, beware! Forensics have a new and very efficient tool. As an example, for the use of ballpoint pens on normal paper, the success rate was 100%. You'll find more details, references and pictures in this overview."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

3D Holograms Detect Fake Signatures More

3D Holograms Detect Fake Signatures

Comments Filter:

  • I would be scared (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jonknee ( 522188 ) * on Sunday August 15, 2004 @07:26PM (#9976782) Homepage
    Is my own writing that similar? What happens if I let my guard down and something slightly different, will I be arrested for fraud by forging my own name?
    • I was also thinking that, I have a very unsteady handwriting and sometimes my signatures are .. wel.. not that good.

      • Re:I would be scared (Score:5, Insightful)

        by jonknee ( 522188 ) * on Sunday August 15, 2004 @07:39PM (#9976849) Homepage
        Even for someone with a good sig, the pressure of having to be perfect might lead to slight variations. I even get nervous with the biometric scanners at Busch Gardens... And you can't really change your hand.

      • Re:I would be scared (Score:5, Insightful)

        by LiquidCoooled ( 634315 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @08:12PM (#9976995) Homepage Journal
        whilst your actual stroke path may be different for every signature, the order of your strokes and the pressure at different points means the paper is imprinted in a certain order.

        For instance, as I draw a capital B, i do my downstroke first, then sweep back up, to the left slightly, and then around for the 3 portion from top to bottom.

        Even if somebody had my signature as an example, they would not be able to match my drawing style.

        it would take a video of me performing the signature as well as paper samples, making it much much more difficult to achieve, and easier to detect.

        This is one of the key elements of a signature that to this point has not been able to be utilised.

        I love being left handed - it is my security by obscurity ;)

        • Re:I would be scared (Score:5, Interesting)

          by fbform ( 723771 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @08:33PM (#9977100)
          a video of me performing the signature as well as paper samples

          I remember watching some signature-detection algorithm on BBC (program was QED actually) a while back which involved a fine grid on which you sign with a touch-pen. The hardware was pretty standard, like the pad which the UPS delivery guy carries around. The algorithm recorded which pixel was toggled (pressed) at what time; it compared this time-delay information to a known good signature time sequence, adjusting for spatial and temporal offsets. And then of course it also did a standard pattern-match between the final signatures. The advantage was that it could easily detect your normal signature from a slowly forged one, even if the end results looked identical. As I recall, it did not give *any* false positives at all under the test runs, but it did reject your own signature a little too often for it to be used widely.

        • Re:I would be scared (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Viceice ( 462967 )
          it would take a video of me performing the signature as well as paper samples, making it much much more difficult to achieve, and easier to detect.

          I realise that this technology is a double edged sword. While it may make detecting fraud more precise, it will also make it possible to create the perfect fake, as analising your signiture with this method will tell the fraudster exactly in what sequence and what strokes you use to create your signiture, without the need for the video.

          And since the goverment
    • You'd have to be wary of something claiming 100% success rate - particularly of false positives.
    • There's no way they'll succeed with my signature. It varies so much from one signature to the next (even if I do them at the same time) that you might think five different people are signing my name. Hell, even the pressure, strokes, and shapes are different.

      My wife was going to try and learn it, but after studying the different signatures for a while she gave up. No need to learn it - it's just a bunch of squiggles and loops.

      • Re:I would be scared (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Beryllium Sphere(tm) ( 193358 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @07:43PM (#9976871) Journal
        >There's no way they'll succeed with my signature. It varies so much from one signature to the next

        Indeed, and that is one of the key security properties of physical signatures. It's a kind of defense against replay attacks. Getting two completely identical signatures can be taken as evidence that one of them is a copy.

        • Re:I would be scared (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Anonymous Coward
          My mom is an elementary school teacher. One year she had a, probably dyslexic, problem child.

          By third grade she had somehow managed not to associate letters or numbers with any meaning or sound. She'd turn in a spelling test where not all the characters were even letters.

          To cope, she had taught herself to copy from other students and was so eerily good at it you could tell from whom she had copied the assignment because she imitated their handwriting. She was really very good at reproducing the images but

    • Re:I would be scared (Score:4, Insightful)

      by foidulus ( 743482 ) * on Sunday August 15, 2004 @07:41PM (#9976854)
      It probably could not stand alone in court, just like testimony of handwriting experts alone is not enough to convict somebody. They would still have to find a motive, an opportunity, history etc.

    • Re:I would be scared (Score:3, Informative)

      by kunudo ( 773239 )
      Nope, because you are after all you. You would not be forging anything. When you sign your name to something, you are defining the original signature, as in, it's yours.

      And if you were to be picked out by this system as a fraudster, it would be relatively trivial for you to identify yourself, given some time. So there would be no risk of going to jail.
      • Obviously you can't be convicted of forging your own sig, but my point is that this could cause a lot of extra work. I don't want to have to "prove it" every time I deposit a check.

        If all I need to do is show ID when the sigs don't match, this is a useless technology--just fake the ID like you would do today.

        • Apparently, when you're depositing a check with your name on it into your account, you don't need a sig, I guess. They just stamp my paycheck ("Fifth Third Bank. For deposit only.") when I go in person to deposit it.
    • ... but depending on how many beers I've had when I am signing the checks for the monthly bills, they are similar.

      I cannot write in cursive to save my soul (well, maybe, if I had too, for THAT), since I have by typing since 4th grade.

      I suspect lots of folks have handwriting sufficiently random to make this worthless.

      I even told my own kids; "Hey, 4th grade is the last time anyone will care what your handwriting looks like -- work on what you are tyring to say, and be clear, most people aren't as smart

    • I don't know about you, but my signature is visibly different every time I write it.
    • are retailers going to accept a system that gives a significant false negative rate? no. so will you ever get hauled to jail by accident? no.

  • IBM did this in the 70s (Score:5, Interesting)

    by goombah99 ( 560566 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @07:26PM (#9976784)
    When I was at IBM yorktown Heights, the guy in the next lab over built a pen that had piezo acclerometers and pressure trnasducers built in. You got the time and pressure curves of the 2-d signature as it was signed. IBM never marketed it.
  • This sounds like it would be totally useless for me, because I have extremely messy handwriting and I can hardly ever produce the same signature twice.
    • I have the same problem as the parent. My signature looks like it was done by a 10 year old. But it is so crap that people know it must be my real signature ;)

      • Re:Messy handwriting (Score:4, Funny)

        by ergo98 ( 9391 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @08:46PM (#9977145) Homepage Journal
        My signature can't be "read" (while it originally derived IHandwrittenName, it was significantly personalized and aesthetically simplified over time), and this has led to quite a few inane "Haha! THAT'S your signature?" comments.

        A signature is just an individualized sequence of muscle movements that technically could be you writing an offensive remark. That's why there's normally a printed name aside it.

        • Re:Messy handwriting (Score:3, Interesting)

          by MachDelta ( 704883 )

          A signature is just an individualized sequence of muscle movements that technically could be you writing an offensive remark.

          Yeah, true that. My mother has worked at a bank for damn near 23 years now, and her signature looks more like the Nike swoosh or a tribal tattoo than a 12 character name.

          As for myself, I share the sentiments of the original poster. My writing is so messy and signature so random, I don't think a system like that would work so hot for me. I guess I do have a few consistencies, like

  • Skip the PopSci (Score:5, Informative)

    by otisaardvark ( 587437 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @07:30PM (#9976798)
    Original article: here [iop.org].

    Abstract

    For legal purposes there is a requirement for the validation of signatures and handwritten documents. A helpful method in this respect is the so-called superposed strokes analysis, based on the observation of some characteristics in the writing, such as some letters and their dynamics.

    This paper introduces a promising new technique for superposed strokes analysis based on conoscopic holography. Through a non-contact 3D measure a 3D profile is created of the superposed strokes that allows the writing dynamics to be determined, such as, for example, if a stroke was drawn clockwise or counterclockwise.

    We propose a 3D analysis by an opto-electronic system, in order to improve the graphology analysis for off-line signature verification.

  • Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @07:31PM (#9976805)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:I doubt the 100% (Score:2, Insightful)

      by fmxda ( 802379 )
      Out of the 126 writers whose handwriting they surveyed, I'm sure at least a few of them have the "messy" and "inconsistent" handwriting that some people think they have. If the techinque measures nuances that professional forgerers are not aware of/in control of, I'm sure that whatever it measures flies under your radar as well.
      • ok but the deal is still this: if you even yourself don't write consistently, or heck, use even the same hand every time then the system _can't_ work 100%(unless you count that it catches 100% of the forgeries but also claims 10% of the authentic one's as forgeries).

        anyhow, such a system would be used just to prove that you didn't write something rather than to prove that you did write something, I'd imagine.
        • maybe I worded it out poorly, now that I read it myself even I'm confused...

          what I meant was that this technique could be used by you as extra proof about that it wasn't necessarely you who wrote it(or vice versa).

          anyhow, signatures suck as authentication - that's why you have couple of other 3rd party people testify all the important contracts.

    • Re:I doubt the 100% (Score:5, Funny)

      by goombah99 ( 560566 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @07:36PM (#9976828)
      "I will bet my life savings"

      okay, send me some samples of your signature and a blank check. And we'll see....

    • I will bet my life savings...

      $23 and half a bag of Fritos isn't much of a bet.

  • Ohhhh, kay. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by AltGrendel ( 175092 ) <`su.0tixe' `ta' `todhsals-ga'> on Sunday August 15, 2004 @07:32PM (#9976807) Homepage
    for the use of ballpoint pens on normal paper, the success rate was 100%.

    So what if I use something else like a gel pen? I do use those to sign check, you know.

    • Ballpoint Pens (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Detritus ( 11846 )
      Ballpoint pens are probably the best choice for signing checks and other documents. The ink is hard to bleach and the ball crushes fibers in the paper, providing a record of pressure applied to the pen. Unfortunately, nobody bothers to look at signatures on most documents, like checks.

      • Re:Ballpoint Pens (Score:3, Interesting)

        by tftp ( 111690 )
        Unfortunately, nobody bothers to look at signatures on most documents, like checks.

        Not just that - the banks are now scanning the original checks and destroying the originals. So anyone with a Photoshop and an inkjet printer has a very good chance to commit a perfect crime, with all the evidence destroyed before the crime is even noticed...

    • So what if I use something else like a gel pen? I do use those to sign check, you know.

      I've always hated ballpoint pens and have used fountain pens for years. Ballpoints take too much pressure, have to be held at a weird angle for me, etc.

      Being currently unemployed, one of the things I've been trying out in my copious free time is calligraphy. I always thought it'd be fun to learn the old-style Spencerian Script [ntlworld.com]. I abandoned cursive about a year after I learned it (2nd grade), so my signature is god-awf

  • People never sign their name the same way twice, there are always variations..

    Some people have fewer then others .. but no one is 100%

  • Signatures are on the way out (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Slotty ( 562298 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @07:33PM (#9976811)
    So obviously we all press down to the same intensity and the curves of our writing remain the same all the time! Screw signatures off soon it will all be done with biometrics. thumb print obtained & verified you are who you say you are.
    • So who's going to replace your finger print and your retinas when someone figures out how to replicate that? Try replacing your fingerprints- I dare you.

      Biometrics DO NOT WORK.
      • Try replacing your fingerprints- I dare you.

        Actually I read an article in Reader's Digest many years ago, about a drug lord who had surgery, not to replace his fingerprints with different ones but to "mangle" his own, so to speak. He got away with that for a while...

        But certainly, I wouldn't expect (and definitely wouldn't want!!) to have this become mainstream. I agree with you in that biometrics are not up to it yet, but I just think it's not practical, not that it'll never work or something like that

  • Skip Roland's spam and stolen images (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 15, 2004 @07:33PM (#9976813)

    3D Holograms Detect Fake Signatures

    Several sources reported last week that a new technique that produces 3D holograms of handwriting could be used to detect fake signatures on checks, credit card receipts or other important handwritten documents. Here are pointers to Nature [nature.com], Scientific American [sciam.com] or BBC News Online [bbc.co.uk]. Instead of using 2D techniques to look at the sequence of pen strokes in a signature, this new method is based on 3D micro-profilometry which permits to translate the writing into an image showing dips and furrows of the sample so that anomalies can be detected. If you plan to imitate your spouse's signature, beware! Forensics have a new and very efficient tool. As an example, for the use of ballpoint pens on normal paper, the success rate was 100%.

    Nature describes the problem and its solution.

    Suspect signatures are usually analysed by expert graphologists, who compare the appearance of different letters in a name with a verified original. However, they are restricted to looking at flat, two-dimensional writing, and good forgeries can sometimes slip through the net.

    The new three-dimensional analysis reveals the sequence in which each pen stroke was made on the page. The technique also highlights differences in the pressure applied by the writer as they marked the page. Such pressure differences are extremely difficult to mimic.

    Let's turn to BBC News for more details.

    Conventionally, handwriting has been analysed by forensic experts in 2D, looking at the sequence of pen strokes in handwriting, like a signature.

    But this is not entirely accurate, because the exact sequence of strokes is not always clear and can vary.

    "Using virtual reality and image processing, it is possible solve two of the most difficult problems in graphology: strokes superposing and strokes direction.

    "These, in particular in case of same inks, are not detectable in a objective way with the traditional methods," Lorenzo Cozzella, part of the research team, told BBC News Online.

    Here is a an example of "profilometric acquisition by means of conoscopic holography. These strokes were made by a BIC pen on common paper. The investigation area is about 5 mm × 5 mm. (a) 3D view of the strokes' profile. It is possible to note the regularity in the (S) line. (b) 3D view of the strokes' profile. The presence of bumps is evident. (c) 3D view with a mirror along the z-axis."

    The research work has been published by the Journal of Optics A: Pure and Applied Optics in its Septemebr issue under the name "Superposed strokes analysis by conoscopic holography as an aid for a handwriting expert." Here are two links to the abstract [iop.org] and the full paper [iop.org] (free registration needed, valid for 30 days, PDF format, 6 pages, 320 KB). The above images come from this paper.

    How is this technique working? Surprisingly well, according to Nature.

    To test their system, the scientists used a database of 126 letters, each written by a different author. In almost 90% of the cases they tested, the author of a particular letter could be identified by comparing details of how their pen strokes crossed with a set of verified writing samples. For ballpoint pens on normal paper, the success rate was 100%.

    If you want to see the

  • Extremely Interesting (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Maxite ( 782150 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @07:38PM (#9976843) Journal
    This is amazing, although I'm surprised by the fact that it isn't already in use *today*! Detectives already have known that when you write on paper, it creates a depression in paper. If you're writing on a note pad, for instance, and after you write your address on the sheet above of a bank holdup note, just lightly rubbing a pencil against the hold up note will reveal the address, the one written on the sheet above the bank holdup note, all because pressure created an indentation in the paper. Plus I do believe people sometimes check when they get rewards, certificates, etc.. to see if the signature is really hand-made, or printed, just by feeling the back for an indentation suggesting that someone was writing on the paper.

  • Electronic Signature Pads (Score:5, Interesting)

    by chris mazuc ( 8017 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @07:39PM (#9976846)
    What about the electronic signature pads in use at many stores, well, everywhere? I used to work at a 7-11, and I can tell you firsthand that the resolution *SUCKS* on these things. Nevermind that they don't take pressure readings. When we first got them my manager signed it with her real name, then "Micky Mouse". I couldn't tell the difference. It'd still be useful for things traditionally signed on paper (insurance policies, etc..), but as far as debit and credit transactions the majority (and a growing number of) of transactions will be unverifiable by this method.

  • And the rate of False Negatives? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CharonX ( 522492 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @07:43PM (#9976868) Journal
    A 100% detection (at least in tests) of false signatures? Great!
    How hard did they try to create a false signature?
    And how often were legit signatures rejected? (I can create an algorithm that filters out 100% of the false signatures, guaranteed - it simply rejects all signatures it gets)
  • ... groklaw [groklaw.net]? I mean, how many other sites use that CSS / graphic? I know I'm dumb to admit this, but after I clicked the link I thought "PJ must be having a slow day ..."

  • The real question is (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    How do I use the DMCA against these bastards. My signature is my property, I don't want any reproductions of it stored in their computers - 3D or not.

  • Will Tablet PCs Come of Age? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by PingPongBoy ( 303994 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @07:44PM (#9976878)
    Just how much closer are tablet PCs to true handwriting recognition? Authentity aside, handwriting appears to be a simple enough problem, but so much emphasis is placed on context. People can write according to lines on a page. A semicolon shouldn't be confused for an i.

    Now if we can detect forgeries with science, surely the science can be programmed to decide whether I wrote the number 1 or the letter l or even know the letter t is not the letter f and the > is not 7.

  • ANOTHER ROLAND! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by toxic666 ( 529648 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @07:48PM (#9976893)
    Why does /. keep posting articles submitted by this guy? He has a shabby blog on radio.weblogs.com and does a poor job stealing other writers work; the site is a blatant commercial effort. Yet /. keeps putting Roland's stuff up and linking to it.

    What's the deal? Is there some kind of commercial payola a la 1970's radio? Maybe the editor has a thing going with Roland, in a Clinton-McGreevy-esque way.

    *Cringe* I didn't need any of those mental images.

  • Roland advertises his link whoring (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jonknee ( 522188 ) * on Sunday August 15, 2004 @08:01PM (#9976954) Homepage
    Roland seemingly gets a Slashdot link to his trashy Radioland blog once every few days, all by stories he writes himself. I looked up a little about are friend here and he advertises [smartmobs.com] that most of his traffic comes from Slashdot!
    This blog, Roland Piquepaille's Technology Trends attracts about 150,000 visitors per month, of which 60% come from Slashdot
    How lame is that? Here's a list [slashdot.org] of his recent articles on /.
    • Roland seemingly gets a Slashdot link to his trashy Radioland blog once every few days, all by stories he writes himself.

      So someone writes original, interesting and informative material, stuff that is truly 'news for nerds', and you bash him for it because he's trying to expand his readership? I mean seriously, talk about tall poppy syndrome.

  • i'm a doctor (Score:5, Interesting)

    by frankmu ( 68782 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @08:04PM (#9976964) Homepage
    and i can barely read my own signature!

    seriously, i sign hundreds of documents every day. what happens when i can't replicate my own writing?

  • Spouse's signature (Score:5, Interesting)

    by chill ( 34294 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @08:04PM (#9976966) Journal
    I sign my wife's name all the time, and she sometimes signs mine. All perfectly legal, as long as neither one disputes it.

    Simply claim you have power of attorney from your spouse. If, when asked, your spouse says "yes, I gave my permission", you're clear.

    Of course, you better be DAMN SURE your spouse is going to back you up.

    "yes, he did. Same way he gave me permission to sign his name on the check buying the mink coat..."
  • They use 3 physical dimensions to determine the order of the strokes, ie, the 4th dimension. But do they keep that 3rd physical dimension around? Would that make it 4d? Or if they discard it, that sort of brings it back to 3d, but since 2 of the d are combined into one, maybe it's 3.5d?

    My head is spinning, and I can't even tell if that is 2d or 3d, because time is certainly involved to have a spin.
  • My signature is a scribble. Nobody could possibly determine what my name was from it, and it doesn't really look much alike from one signing to the next; there aren't even the same number of loops and squiggles except by random chance. However, the style of scribble is such that people can tell it's me.

  • Pointless? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Parallex ( 584658 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @08:32PM (#9977096)
    I'm not sure there's any point trying to prove a signature is authentic -> How many of us actually have formal signatures that we can replicate perfectly? I know sure as hell that my signature is different every time and, sequence of pen stroke or no, I'd fail a test for my own signature every time. I'd instead be working on a way to place an electronic signature - some kind of stamp or something, that acts like a GUID for a person how needs to sign something.

  • The next thing to add (Score:3, Informative)

    by 7-Vodka ( 195504 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @08:36PM (#9977109) Journal
    Would be 4d recognition. The 3 dimensions already listed in the article combined with time. Essentially, a device could record the 3 dimensions as you sign.

  • Background info some may need (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anna Merikin ( 529843 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @08:48PM (#9977160) Journal
    1. No one signs the same exact way twice. That's how some forgers get caught -- copying TOO exactly.

    2. We have all developed habits. Although your signatures may look different from each other, the pressure patterns are usually identical. Forgery detectors use magnifying glasses to detect dicontinuities in the letters or words, indicating a lifting of the pen for a glance at the original being copied. Most people do not lift and replace the pen on the paper while signing their own name.

    3. Some forgers use the trick of holding the signature being copied UPSIDE-DOWN so they can "draw it" instead of writing it. That way they avoid the traps of their own habits showing to an investigator. They are usually the good ones who escape being caught. This technique woiuld easily show that the signature was drawn upside down and last letter first, and they will be caught.

    4. The harder the signature is to read, the EASIER it is to forge. My own signature is perfect Victorian calligraphy done with a chisel-point felt-tip or fountain pen. Let them copy THAT!

    5. Most organizations never check signatures until there is a anamoly. By then, the pro forger is long gone.

    6. Pro forgers will defeat these machines by practicing their marks' signatures until they are perfected.

    As they always have.

  • Wait (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Rie Beam ( 632299 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @08:57PM (#9977185) Journal
    If we have the technology to read signatures, why not just make a device to write signatures? Surely it can't be that hard?

  • they just predicted the death of signatures (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Fratz ( 630746 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @09:18PM (#9977304)
    You figure viable bionic hands may be, what, less than 50 years away? Maybe 30? How hard would it be (in concept) to interface a holographic scan of a known signature sample with your hand's control mechanism, and get it to generate an exact copy of, or an acceptable deviation from, someone else's signature?

    We may not have the tech to exploit it in front of someone at the moment, but I can't imagine a laboratory-style exploit is far off.

    This kind of revelation about how to protect against forgery ends up defining the victory conditions a lot better, giving attackers a clearer target.

    Anyone want to take bets on how soon we'll see an article on an industrious group of technologists who modified a plotter to make automated signatures that cannot be detected as forgeries?

  • Slightly off-topic - countries with no signatures (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Tarq666 ( 545095 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @09:27PM (#9977339)
    I live in Japan and for most legal documents you require a 'hanko' or 'personal seal' (and no...not the type you'll find at Sea World). Most people have several (as do I) and use simple shop purchased, made in bulk, seals for daily business, and a professionally made one for official business (Bank loans, lease agreements etc). The professional ones are difficult (but not impossible) to copy. I had one made several years ago and I take VERY good care of it as anyone can pick it up and stamp it on a document and legally it is the same as if I had stamped the document.

    The system is ancient but wide open to abuse. Several years ago a woman returned from holidays to discover that she had been married to her workmate. He had simply obtained all the paperwork, stamped it with his own seal and then having taken hers from her drawer, stamped it with her seal as well. The marriage was anulled, but the point is the personal seal is a little dangerous in my opinion.

    Anyway, as a result, very few people I know in Japan has what I would call a signature, that is something that you write almost the same way each time. My own signature varies each time I write it an in fact has shrunk over the years, but always contains elements that appear to be hard wired into my hand and brain now. Even if I use a different grip, or even the wrong hand, the pattern is similar (thought obviously different). When my students try to sign something, they usually very neatly write their name in English.

  • Most modern handwriting recognition techniques, such as on my Tablet PC, rely on knowing the order and direction of writing strokes to improve their accuracy. It looks like the techniques described by TFA's sources would provide similar information and might enable machines to finally transcribe handwritten papers reliably.
  • I suffer from several severe forms of anxiety, performance anxiety being one of them. This includes the simple task of signing your name infront of someone in a bank or elsewhere. It is really aweful when you can't even feel comfortable signing your own name when in the presence of someone else.

    My signature changes regularly as I seem to mess up or I can't seem to do it the same every time, it really is fustrating.

  • Consistency (Score:3, Informative)

    by AstrumPreliator ( 708436 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @10:41PM (#9977619)
    My signature has always been inconsistent. Hell, letters start turning into odd scribbles when I'm in a hurry. I've seen my 'z' turn into an atrocious, indiscernible jumble of curves. It's close enough for someone at the bank to glance at and say it's fine, but if someone was actually going to look at it in detail they'll probably think it's forged.

  • vastly exaggerated claims (Score:3, Informative)

    by dekeji ( 784080 ) on Sunday August 15, 2004 @11:32PM (#9977759)
    You can get much more detailed information about how a pen is held, about the timing and order of strokes, and how much pressure is excerted with a modern computer tablet. Even if you have all that information, you don't get anywhere near "100% accuracy" for signature verification. Since the data they work with contains less information, we can pretty much conclude that it must be their experiments that are poorly done, not that they have hit on some amazing new technique.

    That isn't to say that the technique is completely useless. But it won't solve the problem of document forgeries.

    One question one needs to ask, however, is whether the authors have any connection to the maker of conoscopic holography [optimet.co.il] equipment...

  • another use for this (Score:3, Interesting)

    by snot whistle ( 585599 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @12:05AM (#9977857)
    I just RTFA (sorry) and had a thought - this technique could be adapted to a device that could read the information from an LP or an old wax cylinder without touching it.

    This could make a recordings museum caretaker very happy. He could hear the recordings that are too fragile to play.

    If there was a contact-free record player, I wouldn't feel like I should sell all my LPs.

    I remember a story in Analog a few years ago about a man with the only recording of his father's voice on an old lacquer disk which had unfortunately broken. He ends up being able to listen to it due to a tech not unlike this.

    A good story. Damn, I miss having the time to read those every month.

    An affordable application of this for repairing a damaged record (not just applying filters) would certainly end up on my dock.
  • I had a seldom used (foreign) credit card stolen while in the US, so I didn't notice. Thousands of $ were charged to that account before I sal it on the account slip and I contested the account. Visa screwed us by saying the delay for complaint was past and they refused to cancel the transactions. When I asked how come they accept invalid signatures on CC receipts, they said they don't check them. CC companies are such crooks; as long as there's a lot of $ transfer, they don't give a shit whether it's legal

  • What's the point? Nobody checks the sig anyway! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 16, 2004 @05:41AM (#9978831)
    The first time I went to the US, I was astounded to find store clerks swipe my card and then hand it right back to me before I sign the chitty!

    My wife (American, now living in the UK) gets peeved that she can't go shopping with my credit card, because here, shop assistants are trained to CHECK the signature before letting you buy something......

    What a novel idea.

  • Just finished a part time job at a bank where I learned a frightening amount about check fraud. Such technology will do NOTHING to stop professional check cons... Most fraud goes in the check-by-mail or ATM system with enough co-deposits to ensure that the check is never looked at once by a human being, at least not for authenticity or the like. The nice little numbers on the bottom of the check do the trick and the magnetic reader takes it from there. When a person does "proof" or look at the check the
  • When I was a victim of check theft- the attempts were very crude and successful. For example, completely alein signatures, misspellings, riduculous check sequence numbers. The police and bank didnt care, but just ate the loss.
  • Most of the places I sign my signature are starting to use electronic signature collection...so there are no 'dips', 'furrows' etc... embedded in the 'paper' (actually it is kept in a digital format). Essentially, this software would be creating a 3D image of a 2D surface...which would give you - you guessed it! - a 2D surface. Since we can probably bet that these systems and others (like RFIDs - like the one embedded in my keyfob for the gas station - I never sign for anything at my favorite gas station

Slashdot Top Deals

C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas l'Informatique. -- Bosquet [on seeing the IBM 4341]

Close