GB2290053A

GB2290053A - Fingerprint validation of security card user.

Info

Publication number: GB2290053A
Application number: GB9511778A
Authority: GB
Inventors: Edmund A Hurley
Original assignee: JELM Ltd
Current assignee: JELM Ltd
Priority date: 1994-06-09
Filing date: 1995-06-09
Publication date: 1995-12-13
Anticipated expiration: 2015-06-09
Also published as: GB9511778D0; GB9411528D0; GB2290053B

Abstract

An identity (or other security) card bears an optical image of a fingerprint of the authorised user, whereby the identity of a person presenting the card may be checked by comparison of said person's fingerprint against the image on the card at the point of use. As described, the comparison is performed by a machine which digitises both the image on a presented card and the print of a presented finger, and compares the digitised data. It is stated that this enables comparison at a higher resolution than would be possible if the fingerprint data on the card were to be stored as a digital code. The machine preferably includes a CCD(charge-coupled-device) camera to scan the presented prints.

Description

Improvements in or relating to credit cards and other types of authorisation cards It is well known that banks, building societies and other financial institutions lose considerable sums of money annually due to the unauthorised use of credit cards and other types of similar cards which normally authorise the accredited card holder to obtain cash, credit, or validate cheques up to a predetermined amount.

The present invention seeks to provide a card which uses a feature of the card holder which is unique to each card holder that feature is the finger print or finger prints including a thumb print or prints of the card holder.

Proposals have been made to utilise this feature in the prevention of fraud. Typically information relating to a holder's finger prints has been reduced to a digital form and that information has been stored electronically on the card. A machine verifies the card by comparing the digital information on the card with information taken from the holders finger or fingers when presented to the machine.

However the amount of information relating to a finger print or prints which can be stored, electronically, on a card is limited, and the amount of information needed to define a finger print with total accuracy is relatively large. This has generally resulted in recording, electronically, the characteristics of the fingerprint.

The present invention provides a credit card, or any type of card in which a physical impression of the card holders finger prints is held securely, which allows the user to gain access to cash, credit, premises, property such as motor vehicles or for example, computers and other types of apparatus.

The present invention further provides a validating apparatus in which the credit or other card is inserted or presented and the fingers of the card holder are checked for comparison with the finger prints in the card, for example by use of a CCD camera.

The actual fingerprints are impressed onto the card, and this impression is then sealed with a permanent cover.

In another arrangement, a physical impression of the finger print is transferred from the card holder to the card.

For example, the finger can be dusted with a transfer medium, eg a powder, the powder print being removed from the finger by an adhesive on a backing, and the powder print being detached from the backing by laying onto an adhesive on the card, the adhesive on the card being stronger than the adhesive on the backing.

The 3-D impression contained within the card is capable of being compared with the fingerprint of the rightful owner of the card by means of a simple device at the point at which the card is presented for use.

The responsibility for deciding that the card presented belongs to the presenter of the card does not rest with the person to whom the card has been presented. Instead the decision is made by the machine into which the card has been inserted.

If a card is presented by a person whose fingerprints do not match, the card may be rendered inoperable and retained by the machine.

The possibility of a card being lost in the mail, or stolen before it reaches the possession of the rightful holder is reduced because the card blank would be forwarded by the Credit Card Company to a bank or building society branch, or similar, nominated by the card holder. At the point of issue the rightful holder would be recognised by staff of the bank, building society or other issuer.

Provision can be made for the fingerprints of the second hand to be incorporated in the card in the event that the first hand is not available.

Provision is made for distinguishing between the cards of two parties where one account is used by both. For example a suffix can be added to the number of each card, so as to distinguish between them.

In order to ensure that a correct impression had been achieved, the person issuing the card would have available, and would use, a modified apparatus for checking the identity of the card presenter. As soon as the procedure for recording the set of fingerprints had been completed, and the "lid" fixed in place, the card would be inserted into the apparatus. The fingers would be placed on the window, and the checking procedure would commence. However, instead of the apparatus signifying that a match had been made with the first of the fingers presented, the apparatus would be modified so that each of the fingers are compared in turn to show that each of them are identical to the prints in the card.

The Credit Card Company, or other account holder should provide a pair of blanks so that if the impression did not make a match at the first attempt, the procedure could be followed with the second blank. If the first blank was approved by the modified apparatus, the second blank would be destroyed. If it was necessary to use the second blank, and it proved to be a success, the first blank would be destroyed. In the event that neither attempt was completely successful, the most successful card would be given to the cardholder for use until a further set of blank cards could be obtained. At the time when the second set of blanks was available, the original, imperfect, card would be destroyed when a perfect match had been made.

It would cease to be necessary to have insurance to cover any losses, incurred as a result of the misuse of lost or stolen cards, as the cards could not be used other than by the rightful owner.

The blank would be delivered embossed in the present manner, covered by a removable film. The fingerprints of the hand selected by the card holder would be impressed on the specified area of the card. This area would contain a layer of suitable chemicals, capable of recording the pattern of each print, would be fast drying when exposed to air, and should not transfer any residue to the fingers impressed. The card would then be covered by a plastic cover, or similar, perhaps by a process of hot lamination.

It would probably be desirable to have small receptacle into which the card would be inserted. The film would then be removed, avoiding the possibility of the blank being impressed with the prints of the clerk. The receptacle may have metal retainers to guide the fingers so that the prints would be correctly positioned on the card.

When the process was complete, the issuing clerk would insert the card into a modified identification apparatus, and the card holder would present the fingers to the window of the apparatus.

The apparatus would compare each finger print separately, indicating that a match had been made. If a match was made with each of the fingers, that card would be given to the card holder, and the other blank would be destroyed in the presence of the card holder.

If a match had only been made between, say, two of the four fingers presented, the procedure would be repeated with the other blank, when, hopefully, a complete match would be made. However, if the second blank did not produce a complete match, the card with the greatest success rate would be handed to the card holder for use until a further set of blank cards could be obtained from the credit card company.

In the event that neither card produced a complete matching set of prints, and it was necessary to hand the card with the higher success rate to the account holder for use until a further set of blanks could be obtained, it would be necessary for the unissued card to be destroyed, and this should be done in the present of the account holder.

At a point of sale, an apparatus would be used to confirm that a credit card presented as the means for payment did, in fact, belong to the rightful owner of that card.

The card, and a blank credit card voucher, would be inserted into the machine. The card presenter would then place the fingers of the appropriate hand on the window section of the apparatus which would have guides so that the fingers were correctly positioned.

The apparatus would compare each finger presented, with the print contained within the card. A light would be illuminated when a match was made, and simultaneously the locking mechanism within the apparatus would be released, permitting the transaction to proceed.

There is the possibility that a photocopy or other representation of the fingerprints contained within the card may be presented to an unmanned point of sale, for example, a cashpoint, held in place by the fingers of a person who was not the rightful owner of the card. The apparatus would contain biometric sensors which would indicate to the machine that the fingers being used to hold the photocopy in place did not produce pressure in the exact positions required by the card. The sensors would also detect warmth and blood pressure.

The apparatus would then impress the credit card details onto the voucher and would make an additional impression on the voucher identifying the number of that specific apparatus. When this had been done, the apparatus would eject the card and the completed voucher, and the completed voucher could then be signed by the credit card holder. This signature would not be necessary, of course, but people have become so used to signing for their credit purchases that there may be a psychological advantage in retaining this custom.

In the event that the apparatus was unable to make a match between the fingers presented, and the prints contained within the card, the apparatus would render the card inoperable.

The operative at the point of sale would ensure that the expiry date of the card had not been reached, that a card edged in blue was being presented by a gentleman, and a card edged in pink, by a lady before inserting the card into the apparatus.

Some Applications To restrict a card holder, access to cash or credit, to validate cheques, and rightfully obtain information about another person.

To permit, or restrict, access to any premises, property, the use of motor vehicles or similar.

To remove the necessity to rely on PIN numbers.

To deny access to computers by "hackers", and to deny dishonest employees access to information in, or unauthorised use of computers.

To prevent persons from cashing stolen DSS payment orders, and to prevent multiple applications for the same benefit.

To enable banks to prevent unauthorised access to information, to improve the security of bank premises.

To prevent motor vehicles from being stolen.

Claims

1. A credit or other type of authorisation card including a physical impression of a print of at least one finger of one hand of the accredited card holder.

2. A card as claimed in claim 1 including upto three or four impressions of the fingers of the card holder.

3. A card as claimed in claim 1 or claim 2 in which the physical impressions are formed by contact between the finger or fingers and an impressionable medium provided on the card, the medium being hardenable and having a translucent cover.

4. A card as claimed in claim 1 or claim 2 in which the finger prints are formed by dusting the or each finger with a transfer medium in a powder form, the medium being removed from the finger or fingers by an adhesive on a backing material and the powder print being secured to the card by an adhesive on the card the strength of which is greater than the strength of the adhesive on the backing material.

5. A method of using a card as claimed in any one of the preceding claims in which the card is presented for validation and the card holder presents one or more fingers for comparison with the physical impressions on the card, the impressions on the card being compared with the actual finger or fingers of a card holder and as a result of the comparison between the fingers presented and the impressions on the card the card is validated or denied.

6. An apparatus for the use of the card as claimed in any one of the preceding claims in which the impressions of the finger prints on the card are compared with the card presenter's actual fingers, the comparison being carried out by the use of a CCD camera.

7. A card substantially as herein described.

8. A method of using a card substantially as herein described.

9. An apparatus for use with the card substantially as herein described.