Hitoshi Kokumai

1年前 · 1 分の読書時間 · visibility ~10 ·

chat 著者への問い合わせ

thumb_up 関連性 message コメント

External Body Features Viewed as ‘What We Are’

External Body Features Viewed as ‘What We Are’Your external body features<br />
declared to be ‘what you are’<br />
<br />
 <br />
<br />
Can you be happy?

Body features are no more than body features

Can you be happy to see your external body features declared to be ‘what you are’?

Quite a few security experts have long asserted that there are three components for identity authentication – ‘What We Remember’ (Secret Credential), ‘What We Have’ (Tokens and Cards) and ‘What We Are (Body Features).

Feeding a correct secret credential is under our control. So is presenting a correct token or card to some extent. But our body features are just beyond our control. Wouldn’t it be more appropriate to call it ‘What Our Body Features Are’?

Furthermore, whether the secret credential is correct or not is ‘Yes or No’, in other words, it is deterministic. So are the token and card. But measurements of our body features give us the answer as X% probable and Y% improbable. It has to be inevitably probabilistic due to the inherent nature of body features of living animals that we can by no means put under our control.

‘What we remember’ and ‘What we have’, which are both deterministic, can be used together in a security-enhancing ‘two-layer’ deployment, whereas probabilistic ‘what our body features are’ can actually be used with another factor only in a security-lowering ‘two-entrance’ deployment.

As such we have now come to observe that we actually have two factors of ‘what we remember’ and ‘what we have’ as valid authenticators for identity assurance, with ‘what our body features are’ to be counted in cyberspace as an optional tool to increase convenience at the sacrifice of security.

It might sound a bit outrageous to the old school who have long taken it for granted that ‘what we are’ is made of our external body features. But we are confident that the public will agree with us at the end of the day.

What makes ‘What We Are’

Cognitive science supports the observation that our sense of self is made of our memory, especially a part of our autobiographic memory named episodic memory. This observation of our identity is also supported by a number of philosophers. We can rely on these observations for stating that what makes ‘what we are’ is ‘what we remember’.

We may be a minority in the domain of cyber security and identity management at present, but it does not affect what is correct and what is wrong.

Click the link for more  https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/external-body-features-viewed-what-we-hitoshi-kokumai

thumb_up 関連性 message コメント
Hitoshi Kokumai

Hitoshi Kokumai

1年前 #2

I do not think which of password and biometrics is better or worse. The two belong to different categories. Our body features may identify us at a certain probability, but the same body features are unable to get us authenticated on its own by deciding'Yes or No' because of its probabilistic nature. On the other hand, although passwords are not able to get us identified (it's the role of User ID/Name), the same passwords are able to get us authenticated effectively by deciding 'Yes or NO'.

Debesh Choudhury

Debesh Choudhury

1年前 #1

If our body features can't identify us reliably, then Hitoshi Kokumai, you are correct to say that we need not trust the body feature based techniques for supporting our digital identity. The security based on what we remember, i.e., passwords, are better.

その他の記事 Hitoshi Kokumai