WO2012136138A1

WO2012136138A1 - Anti-counterfeiting using asymmetrical dual codes on product

Info

Publication number: WO2012136138A1
Application number: PCT/CN2012/073523
Authority: WO
Inventors: M. Zeming GAO; Pingyi Yan; Wei Zhang
Original assignee: Coentre Ventures Llc
Priority date: 2011-04-04
Filing date: 2012-04-05
Publication date: 2012-10-11

Abstract

An anti-counterfeiting method uses a product-identifying code to identify the product item, and it uses a verification code to verify the product-identifying code. Both the product-identifying code and the verification code are reproduced on or in the product item. The verification code is preferably a covert code only conditionally revealed. To verify the authenticity of the product item, the user sends the product-identifying code to a verification center, which identifies the verification code associated with the received product-identifying code. The method allows a comparison between the identified verification code with a verification code found on or in the target item in order to verify authenticity of the received product-identifying code. The verification code may either be a random code or computed from the respective product-identifying code using a hash function. The method is preferably implemented in form of a mobile application.

Description

ANTI-COUNTERFEITING USING ASYMMETRICAL DUAL

CODES ON PRODUCT

RELATED APPLICATIONS

[0001] This application is a continuation-in-part of US application Ser. No. 13/079,024, filed April 4, 2011, entitled "ANTI-COUNTERFEITING MARKING WITH ASYMMETRICAL CONCEALMENT", which application is incorporated in its entirety into this application.

BACKGROUND

[0002] Product counterfeiting is a large and ever worsening problem in today's world economy. Not only does counterfeiting cause hundreds of billion dollars of losses, it also poses a threat to the life quality and the life safety of consumers.

[0003] Many anti-counterfeiting methods have been used and proposed in the past and the present, including both legal/social solutions and technological solutions. Technological solutions range from holograms, mass serialization, RFID, and chemical and physical analytical tests. Of the available solutions, some do not offer effective anti-counterfeiting while others are too complicated and costly.

[0004] For example, mass serialization requires a unique identifier for each individual product item sold or delivered to consumers. The unique product identifier may be used to check the authenticity of the corresponding product item. This requires a massive effort at the system level and requires a broad standard to be established and enforced. In addition, although mass serialization may be effective on discouraging mass counterfeiting which makes identical product items with identical markings or labeling, it is not effective on making counterfeit products which bear verifiable product identifiers on each item. This is because with product identifiers on the genuine products easily readable, it isn't prohibitively difficult to gain access to product identifiers, even a large number of them, for use on counterfeit products.

[0005] To alleviate the above problem, one proposal is to conceal the product identifier using a scratch-off material, and let the consumer remove the scratch-off when purchasing the product in order to use the uncovered product identifier to verify the authenticity of the product. This method, however, has its own disadvantages. For example, the method requires the consumer to remove a large area of scratch-off material for each item purchased, causing an unpleasant consumer experience. The problem is especially prominent when a long product identifier is used to achieve a necessary level of identification, or a 2-D code is needed for product identification.

[0006] There is a need to develop better and more practical and convenient anti-counterfeiting methods.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

[0007] This patent application discloses an anti-counterfeiting method which takes advantage of a previously unrealized asymmetric nature between the amount of information that needs to be concealed to effectively discourage counterfeiting and the amount of information required for sufficiently identify an article such as a product. Specifically, the amount of information that needs to be concealed to effectively discourage counterfeiting can be far less than the amount of information that is required to sufficiently identify an article. As a result, it is unnecessary to conceal the entire product identification information in order to effectively prevent counterfeiting. Alternatively, it is possible to have two different codes of asymmetric sizes, one large and one small, used in combination for product identification and anti- counterfeiting respectively.

[0008] Two separate codes can be used in combination for this purpose, of which the first code is an overt code, and the second code is a covert code. In one embodiment, the first code alone is sufficient for identifying the article to be authenticated. The second code (the covert code) is only long enough to discourage counterfeiting but does not have to contain enough information to identify the product by itself. For the purpose of authenticity verification, the first code is used to identify the article, while the second code is used to verify the first code.

[0009] In one embodiment, the method generates a plurality of product-identifying codes each identifying a unique item of a product, and generates a plurality of verification codes each being associated with a respective product-identifying code for verifying the respective product-identifying code. Method allows the plurality of product-identifying codes and the plurality of verification codes to be reproduced on or in the product. Each product-identifying code and the associated verification code are reproduced on a respective unique item of the product identifiable by the product-identifying code. A verification center receives a product- identifying code found on a target item which is being checked for authenticity, and identifies the verification code associated with the received product-identifying code. The method allows a comparison between the identified verification code with a verification code found on or in the target item in order to verify authenticity of the received product-identifying code.

[00010] The verification codes may be either randomly generated or computed from the product-identifying codes using a hash function. The product-identifying codes may either be a structured codes generated based on certain rules, or computed from an original set of structured codes.

[00011] The method may be computer implemented using a mobile device. The mobile device acquires both the product-identifying code and the verification code placed on or in the product item be authenticated, and communicates the acquired codes to a verification center. The mobile device that receives a verification result from the verification center, in response to communicating the first code and the second code. The verification result is determined according to whether the received verification code matches a verification code associated with the product-identifying code.

[00012] Alternatively, the mobile device acquires the product-identifying code placed on or in a product item, and communicates the acquired code to the verification center. The mobile device then receives from the verification center a verification code and product information associated with the first code to allow a user to determine whether the product item matches the product information received from the verification center, and whether the verification code received matches the verification code placed on or in the product item. [00013] The method disclosed herein can be used with a variety of code schemes, including plain human-readable codes, encoded machine-readable codes, one-dimensional codes, and various two-dimensional codes.

[00014] This Summary is provided to introduce a selection of concepts in a simplified form that are further described below in the Detailed Description. This Summary is not intended to identify key features or essential features of the claimed subject matter, nor is it intended to be used as an aid in determining the scope of the claimed subject matter.

DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

[00015] The detailed description is described with reference to the accompanying figures. In the figures, the left-most digit(s) of a reference number identifies the figure in which the reference number first appears. The use of the reference numbers which are identical except for the leading figure digit(s) in different figures indicates similar or identical items.

[00016] FIG. 1 shows a flow process of an exemplary embodiment of the anti- counterfeiting method in accordance with the present disclosure.

[00017] FIGS. 2A-2C show an exemplary anticounterfeiting code used in the exemplary embodiment of the anti-counterfeiting method.

[00018] FIGS. 3A-3C show an exemplary anticounterfeiting code using a barcode as the product-identifying code.

[00019] FIGS. 4A-4C show an exemplary anticounterfeiting code using a 2-D code as the product-identifying code.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[00020] The anti-counterfeiting method is disclosed in further detail below using several exemplary embodiments with reference to various figures. In this description, the order in which a process is described is not intended to be construed as a limitation, and any number of the described process blocks may be combined in any order to implement the method, or an alternate method.

[00021] A typical anti-counterfeiting process involves a manufacturer, a retailer and a consumer, and possibly also other parties such as a shipping company and a distributor.

However, anti-counterfeiting process may also involve a non-retailing process, such as a banking or government transaction involving documents, bills or checks that need to be authenticated. In the exemplary embodiments of this detailed description, a product is described as the object of authentication by a buyer or consumer. Such description is not meant to be restrictive but only illustrative. The product can be any article that needs to be authenticated, while the consumer may be any user or authorized person that desires the authentication of the article.

[00022] In addition, the actor in the exemplary processes of this description is only illustrative. Any appropriate party, an anti-counterfeiting service provider, a manufacturer, a designer, a service provider, a supplier, a logistics company, a shipping company, a seller, or a buyer may act to exercise the anti-counterfeiting method.

[00023] An exemplary embodiment of the disclosed anti-counterfeiting method is illustrated in reference to FIG. 1 and FIGS. 2A, 2B and 2C. [00024] FIG. 1 shows a flow process of the exemplary embodiment of the anti- counterfeiting method.

[00025] At Block 1 S 1 , manufacturer, supplier or provider provides information of a product for which in anti-counterfeiting measure is desired. The product information is received by the owner, provider or operator of an anti-counterfeiting system and put into the anti-counterfeiting system. This can be practiced by a single company (which acts as both the manufacturer of the product and the operator of anti-counterfeiting system), a few companies (of which the manufacturer uses anti-counterfeiting system of another company), or many companies (of which many manufacturers, suppliers or providers share a common anti- counterfeiting system operated by another company). The supplying and receiving of the product information varies depending on how the anticounterfeiting system is implemented.

[00026] At Block 1 S2, the anticounterfeiting system generates product-identifying codes using the received product information., Although this may be done separately on a computer system operated by another party, it is preferred that the anticounterfeiting system generates product-identifying codes within the system itself to avoid transporting or communicating the product-identifying codes from one system to another.

[00027] One example of product-identifying codes is a structured code including multiple code segments each designated to a particular type of product information, such as company/enterprise identification, industry type information, product classification (food, drugs, cosmetics, clothing, electronics etc.), product category, date information (the date of code generation and/or the date of production), product serial number, and packaging tier information (from large container to medium boxes, cartons, smaller boxes and individual items). The product code may also contain a check digit for the purpose of error detection. For products in the international commerce, it may further have a code segment for country/region information. The product code generation system may use a national or international standard such as that promoted by EPCglobal. A product code used by a universal system to uniquely identify each individual item of any type may require more than 20 (e.g., 25 or 28) digits.

[00028] Unless a standard is adopted, the product-identifying code can be any type of a code that is sufficient to identify the product. Different manufacturers may need various levels of product identification. At a very low level, the product code may only be able to identify a certain product type or model. But in order to offer sufficiently effective anti-counterfeiting, higher level of specificity of the product identification is preferred. For example, the product code preferably uniquely identifies a production batch of the same product, and more preferably uniquely identifies a package of the same product, and still more preferably uniquely identifies each separate product as an individual piece. If the manufacturer, or the anti- counterfeiting service provider, participates in a standard body for mass serialization, the product code assigned may not only be product-specific among other products of the same manufacture or the same industry, but also be product-specific among all products in the commerce that participate in the mass serialization standard.

[00029] The product-identifying codes may be generated individually or in groups (e.g. for a batch production of a certain product). The system may be designed to automatically generate the product-identifying codes as the manufacturer provides the product information online.

[00030] It is appreciated that the product code may be in an human-readable form, such as plain numbers or alphanumerical combinations, but may also be a machine-readable form such as information that is only visible to special readers (either non-encoded or encoded), or encoded information that requires a special reader with a matching decoder to read. It is also appreciated that either linear codes (ID codes) such as ID barcodes, or 2-D (matrix) codes such as QR codes and Microsoft Tags may be used.

[00031] Although the structured codes as described above may be used as the final product-identifying codes to be reproduced on the product, another set of codes with less apparent structure may be generated based on the structure codes to be used as the final product-identifying codes instead. Various schemes of code transformation, including hashing, encryption, or compression may be used to generate a corresponding set of product-identifying codes from the original structured codes. For example, a hash function may be used to compute a shorter (e.g., 16 digits) and less structured (without distinctive code segments) code from a longer (e.g. 25 digits) structured code. The computation algorithm to preferably guarantee a one-to-one correspondence between the shorter and less structured codes and the longer structured codes, in order that the resultant product-identifying code may still have the level of specificity of the original structured code. The shorter code has the advantage of being easier to store and reproduce by an authorized party yet more difficult to mass reconstruct by an unauthorized party.

[00032] If a hash function is used to generate a set of shorter codes, a proper hash function may be chosen according to the particular needs. In a typical anticounterfeiting application, following characteristics may be factors to be considered in choosing a proper hash function: (1) The ability to avoid collisions in the resultant shorter codes. That is, two different input codes (longer structured codes) should not produce the same output code (shorter code to be placed on or in the product). Although there is no need for an absolute zero-collision requirement, it is more desirable to have fewer collisions, especially for product codes in certain proximity in terms of industries, product types, and date. (2) Because it may be difficult to keep the structured codes in secret, it is also desirable to have a certain level of secrecy or unpredictability in the hash function that is being used. Unpublished special-purpose hash functions may be used. Alternatively, randomly selecting a hash function among the family of such functions which may be known to others may also give a satisfactory level of secrecy. When it comes to anti-counterfeiting, what matters is not an academic impossibility, but instead a practical burden on the counterfeiters. There are numerous types of hash functions, and further there are variable hash functions in each hash function family. Therefore, changing the selection of hash function from time to time may create sufficient amount of burden on the counterfeiters. (3) Preferably, it should be difficult to reverse the result of the hash function. That is, one should not be allowed to easily reconstruct the original structured product code from an unstructured product-identifying code seen on a product. This makes counterfeiting difficult because unless the counterfeiter uses the same product-identifying code found on a genuine product, it may be difficult to come up with a legitimate product-identifying code which identifies the same type of a product made by the same manufacturer. However, this characteristic is relatively less important when using the presently disclosed method because the anti-counterfeiting effect primarily comes from the covert verification code, rather than the overt product-identifying code. (4) A preferred hash function should not be too expensive to compute. This may become an important factor when a large number of codes need to be computed at the same time.

[00033] A special-purpose hash function may be designed to take advantage of the known structure of the original product-identifying codes. However, known hash functions may also be used. Perfect hashing is not required. [00034] At Block 1 S3, the anti-counterfeiting system generates verification codes. The verification codes are each associated with one of the product-identifying code such that the system is able to identify the respective verification code when given a particular product- identifying code. This way, the system may use the identified verification code to verify the authenticity of a respective product-identifying code. To do this, the verification code is preferably hidden and only conditionally revealed to an authorized person (such as an end-user or a buyer of the product) as described herein.

[00035] A straightforward method to generate verification codes is to generate such codes randomly. To associate a verification code with a certain product-identifying code, the two codes may be stored together in a manner that the product-identifying code is linked to the associated verification code in the data structure.

[00036] Alternatively, the verification codes may be computed from the respective product-identifying codes using a hash function. This way, the verification codes may not need to be saved in the anti-counterfeiting system. Rather, after an authorized party (e.g., a manufacturer, a packaging company, or a printing company) has received the product- identifying code, it computes the correct verification code at a time when the code is needed. Similarly, the verification system itself may not need to store the verification codes, but instead compute them on-demand and uses them for the purpose of verification.

[00037] The verification codes may either be computed directly from the original product-identifying codes which are longer and structured or computed from the shorter product-identifying codes which themselves are computed from the original codes.

[00038] The preferences for a proper hash function used for computing confirmation codes from the product-identifying codes may be different from that for a proper hash function used for computing product-identifying codes from the original structured codes. For example, if a hash function is used to generate a four digit verification code from a sixteen digit product- identifying code, collisions are unavoidable. That is, it is possible that multiple different product-identifying codes would result in the same confirmation code. But as discussed herein, this does not affect the primary anti-counterfeiting benefits of the disclosed method. However, there may be a greater need for the secrecy of the hash function(s) used for computing confirmation codes as compared to the hash function(s) used for computing the product- identifying codes.

[00039] It is appreciated that if the verification codes are generated by a hash function applied over product-identifying codes, the probability of having a collision is usually higher than the ideal situation where the verification codes are generated randomly. If the verification codes are generated as random codes, the probability of two different product-identifying codes sharing the same verification code is 1 M, where M is the total number of distinct verification codes that are possible. For example, if the verification code each has four digits, M would be 10000, resulting in a 1/10000 probability of having a collision. Given the same size of the verification codes, the probability of having a collision may be higher than that when the verification codes are generated using a hash function. However, it is appreciated that the effectiveness of the disclosed anticounterfeiting method does not require perfection, but only needs to generate a practical burden on the counterfeiter. As discussed herein, in practice even a probability as high as 1/10 what create a significant burden on a counterfeiter.

[00040] Furthermore, a universal hashing scheme may be used to decrease the probability of collision, making it close to that of ideal random codes. A universal hashing scheme is a randomized algorithm that selects a hashing function among a family of such functions to ensure that the hash function application will behave as well as, in a probabilistic sense, if it were using a random function over the same range of the input data.

[00041] Even when only a single hash function is used at any given time to compute verification codes, the selection of the single hash function may change from time to time in order to enhance the secrecy of the hash function used.

[00042] Using a hash function to generate the verification codes may have a benefit of easier and more robust code management and delivery. For example, the product-identifying codes may be first generated by the anti-counterfeiting system and delivered to the

manufacturer (or a printing company, or a packaging company working with the manufacturer) along with the hash function used for generating the verification codes. All information may be packaged, encrypted, and stored in a secure device, such that the verification codes may be generated again only at an authorized location using authorized equipment by an authorized person. Using this method, the verification codes do not suffer vulnerability during shipping and handling of the codes.

[00043] It is discovered that even a very small verification code can have a meaningful anti-counterfeiting effect. An advantage of having a relatively small covert code is that it does not cause a significant inconvenience for authorized persons to reveal the covert code. For example, a mere two-digit code would have one hundred possibilities. A counterfeit product bearing a randomly guessed two-digit code would only have a 1% of a chance to have the correct code and a 99% of a chance to have a wrong one. If the counterfeiter is to make a hundred counterfeiter products to statistically guarantee one success, he runs the risk of having ninety nine out of the hundred detected as a counterfeit and rejected in the market. This creates a large penalty factor and causes a heavy burden on the counterfeiter, and turns the economics against the counterfeiter, while at the same time does not create a heavy burden on the authorized persons.

[00044] FIG. 2A shows an exemplary product code used in accordance with the present disclosure. Product-identifying code 201c, which is a plain numerical code in the illustrated embodiment, and verification code 202c are separately generated as two different codes, even though it is possible to generate the two codes as different segments of a single code. In practice, a large number of product identifying codes are generated at the same time for a certain product produced by a certain company during a period of time.

[00045] The product-identifying code 201c is long or large enough to be used for identifying a unique product item among a large number of product items. The verification code 202c is associated with the product-identifying code 201c such that the system is able to identify the correct verification code 202c when given the product-identifying code 201c.

[00046] Returning to FIG. 1 , at Block 1 S4, the manufacturer reproduces the product- identifying code (201 c) and the verification code (202c) on the product that can benefit from the anti-counterfeiting method. This can be done in a variety of ways on a variety of products. Any practical means that suits the manufacturer's requirements may be used. For example, the product may be any kind of merchandise that potentially suffers the threat of counterfeiting. The examples include a drug, a branded liquor product, wine, cigarettes, clothes, food, supplements, a tool, a document, etc. The reproduction of the product code may be done in any practical way. In general, however, the reproduced product code should preferably not be easily removed without causing a detectable damage or change to the reproduced product code and/or the product itself. If the product is contained in a packaging such as a box or a bottle, it is also generally preferred that the product contained in the packaging cannot be easily removed from the packaging without causing a detectable damage or change to the reproduced product code.

[00047] The product codes may be printed on a separate label or tag of a suitable material and affixed to the product, but may also be printed or produced on the product itself if practical. In the present description, the term "product tag" may refer to any of these situations and does not necessarily suggest that physically separated or separable item. It is noted that reproducing a product code on the product does not mean that the product is necessarily made first, and the product code is reproduced on the product subsequently. The product and the product code may be made in a single manufacturing process.

[00048] FIGS. 2B-2C show an exemplary product label 200 with the product-identifying code 201c and the verification code202c reproduced thereon. The product label 200 may be attached to an exterior surface of the product packaging or inside the product packaging. When reproducing the product-identifying code and the verification code on the product,

manufacturer conceals the verification code on the product. An example of such concealment is illustrated in FIG. 2B where the verification code 202c is blocked from normal viewing or reading. Any suitable method may be used to accomplish such concealment. The goal is to cover the verification code 202c and make it invisible or unreadable under normal conditions. At the same time, it is preferred that the concealment may be fairly easily removed for product authenticity check without requiring a special tool. To effectively guards against counterfeiting, the concealment should only be removable at least partially invasively, and once removed, should not be easily restored without leaving any visible marks to indicate that the concealment has once been removed to reveal the verification code. The invasiveness at least partially damages or permanently alters the concealment such that it cannot be easily restored to its original condition.

[00049] One suitable method to achieve this goal is applying a scratch-off layer 232 to cover the second code 202c. The scratch off layer 232 can be fairly easily scratched off without using a special tool to reveal the code 202c, and at the same time cannot be easily restored to cover the region again. An alternative is to use a layer of material that can be peeled off.

[00050] It is noted that the product-identifying code 201c and the verification code 202c do not have to be reproduced in the same area, or the same tag, but can be reproduced at different areas or different parts and locations on the product. Particularly, it is conceived that the product-identifying code 201c may be displayed in an exterior part of the product or product packaging, while the verification code 202c may be hidden in an area which is accessed only when the product packaging is opened. For example, the product-identifying code 201c may be printed on an exterior surface of a box packaging, while the verification code 202c may be placed inside the box and accessible only after the box is opened. For another example, the product-identifying code 201c may be printed on an exterior surface of a bottle packaging, while the verification code 202c may be placed or printed on the inner surface of a cap or lid close in the bottle.

[00051] At Block 1 S5, a verification center receives a product-identifying code found on a target item being checked for authenticity. The target item is a product item which bears a product-identifying code. The product item may be a distinct item at any package level, such as a retail item. [00052] In this disclosure, the term "verification center" is only illustrative. Although a distinctive physical center conducting verifications is envisioned in one embodiment, the verification may be carried out in any feasible form. A verification node, either centralized or distributed, completely computerized or human-assisted, may exist in an anti-counterfeiting system to facilitate the verification process.

[00053] At Block 1 S6, the verification center identifies the verification code associated with the received product-identifying code. As discussed herein, there may be various ways to do this. In one embodiment, the correct verification code is saved along with the associated product-identifying code in a storage accessible by the verification center. The verification center first determines whether the received product-identifying code matches one of the product-identifying codes saved at the storage. If a match is found, the verification center looks up the verification code in association with the matching product-identifying code. In an alternative embodiment, however, the verification codes are not saved at a storage accessible by the verification center. Instead, the verification center computes the verification code from the received product-identifying code using the same hash function which was used to generate the verification codes originally at block 1 S3. Alternatively, the verification center may first determine whether the received product-identifying code matches one of the product- identifying codes saved at the storage, and computes the verification code from the matching product-identifying code using the hash function only if a match is found.

[00054] At Block 1 S7, the method allows one to compare the identified verification code with a verification code found on the target item in order to verify the authenticity of the received product-identifying code. This can be done in several alternative ways according to various embodiments. In one embodiment, the verification center receives the verification code found on or in the target item, and determines whether the received verification code matches the verification code identified (or computed) within the system. If it does, the verification center considers the received product-identifying code to be authentic, which in turn indicates that the target item bearing the product-identifying code is likely also authentic. In an alternative embodiment, the verification center may send the identified verification code to an authorized person who may compare the received identified verification code with the verification code found on or in the target item. A match indicates that the item is likely to be authentic.

[00055] The concealed verification code 202c is conditionally revealed to an authorized person. The conditional revealing of the verification code 202c generally requires physical access to the product. It also requires the concealment over the verification code 202c to be at least partially invasively removed to uncover the concealed verification code 202c on the product. In the illustrated embodiment, the concealment is a scratch-off layer 232. As the authorized person gains physical access to the product, he may be allowed to manually remove the scratch-off layer 232 to reveal the verification code 202c.

[00056] FIG. 2C shows an example of the product label 200 after the concealment has been removed. In the illustrated embodiment, the concealment is a scratch-off layer 232. After the authorized person has removed the scratch-off layer 232, the verification code 202c is revealed.

[00057] The communication between the authorized person and the verification center may be carried out in a variety of ways, including a telephone by voice, a telephone to dial in numbers, a wireless phone using short messaging, a mobile application platform, and Internet- based user interface. The two-way communication may be done using simple text messaging such as SMS.

[00058] The disclosed anti-counterfeiting method can be computer-implemented and performed by one or more processors and communication channels for verifying authenticity of a product. According to this embodiment, the verification center has a mobile communication center. The user acquires the product-identifying code and the verification code on or in a product item using a mobile device such as a cell phone. The user communicates the codes to the verification center using the mobile device. In response to receiving the first code and the second code, the verification center returns a verification result to the mobile device of the user. The verification result is determined according to whether the received verification code matches the verification code associated with the product-identifying code.

[00059] Alternatively, the user acquires using a mobile device the product-identifying code placed on or in a product item, and communicates the acquired product-identifying code to a verification center. The user then receives from the verification center a verification code and product information associated with the first code to allow the user to determine whether the product item matches the product information received from the verification center, and whether the verification code received matches the verification code placed on or in the product item.

[00060] A special-purpose mobile application program may be installed on the mobile device to facilitate the process of acquiring the codes from the product item, communicating the codes to the verification center, and receiving the verification result from the verification center. The codes may be either machine read or manually input. For example, the longer product-identifying code may be automatically read using an optical means of the mobile device, while the shorter verification code may be manually entered by the user through the user interface of the mobile application.

[00061] The method may be incorporated in a non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions for causing one or more processors to perform the above described operations.

[00062] There are various options in designing the user interface to facilitate the disclosed anticounterfeiting method. For example, the product-identifying code and the verification code may be entered separately following an interactive process with the verification center. The product-identifying code is first acquired and sent to the verification center, which first verifies whether the received product-identifying code is legitimate. If not, the verification center informs the user that the product-identifying code received is either illegitimate or unrecognized. If yes, the verification center then requests the user to enter the verification code in order to further verify whether the received product-identifying code is authentic. This way, the product-identifying code alone is used as a threshold check to screen out some products which bear fake product-identifying codes without further requiring the entering of the verification code. This can be performed before the concealment on the product label is removed to reveal the verification code 202c.

[00063] In another embodiment, the verification center is a call center which receives the codes from the authorized person over telephone. The codes may be provided either by voice or entered through a keypad on the telephone. Call-center may either have human operators or automatic voice processing.

[00064] The verification center may also send to the authorized person other information related to the product being verified at the time of verification. Examples of such information include prices, store locations, ratings of the product, coupons, or recommendation of related products.

[00065] To discourage counterfeiters from using real product codes recycled from used products, the verification center may keep records for the past verifications, and either reject a call for verification or send out a warning when the received product code has already been used for verification once or more in the past.

[00066] Referring back to FIGS. 2 A, 2B and 2C, the verification code 202c is preferably substantially smaller than the product-identifying code (e.g., 201 c). It is discovered that the amount of information that needs to be concealed from a potential counterfeiter to effectively discourage counterfeiting can be far less than the information that is required to sufficiently identify a product. Thanks to this asymmetric nature between the counterfeit-hampering information and the product-identifying information, only a relatively small code needs to be concealed in order to have a counterfeit-hampering effect.

[00067] In the example shown FIGS. 2A, 2B and 2C, the verification code 202c has only three digits. When these three digits are concealed from normal viewing and can only be invasively revealed, they create odds of one out of a thousand (1/1000) for a randomly guessed number to match the concealed covert verification code 202c. This means that if a would-be counterfeiter wants to statistically guarantee that at least one of its counterfeit products can pass the anti-counterfeiting verification, the counterfeiter will have to make a thousand such counterfeit products with all other nine hundred ninety nine facing rejection by the anti- counterfeiting verification. This creates a huge burden for counterfeiting and would make it unprofitable for counterfeiting virtually anything in the commerce. For ordinary products, even an odd of one out of ten created by a single-digit covert code may be a sufficient anti- counterfeiting measure. If alphabetical letters or other symbols are used in the product code instead of just numbers, the odds can be even smaller. For counterfeiters who are used to unrestrained and unburdened counterfeiting, this is already a dramatic increase of burden.

[00068] The discovery that only a small code or a small part of the product code needs to be concealed in order to hamper counterfeiting makes the anti-counterfeiting method of the present disclosure easy to implement. The prior art methods require removing the concealment of a long or large code, and therefore can be a hassle for a consumer to do. Scratching off a covering of a long string of numbers, for example, is often not only time-consuming but also an unsightly and messy one. If a 2-D product code is used, it may result in even greater inconvenience and may prove to be too consumer-unfriendly to be implemented.

[00069] With the anti-counterfeiting method disclosed herein, however, the code or the portion of the code that needs to be concealed may be relatively small. For example, it may only occupied a fraction (e.g., less than one half, less than one quarter, or even smaller) of the area which is occupied by the product-identifying code as a whole. With alphanumerical code, just one or a few (e.g., one to six) concealed alphanumerical positions may provide an effective anti-counterfeiting measure.

[00070] It is noted that the effectiveness of the anti-counterfeiting method disclosed herein does not require a technological impossibility or even a real hardship for restoring the concealment. As long as the method makes it more difficult for a would-be counterfeiter to make counterfeit products, it has an anti-counterfeiting effect. When no anti-counterfeiting measure is implemented, a counterfeiter can freely make a counterfeit product with an arbitrary label that just visually appears similar to the product code of the manufacturer. When only an overt product-identifying code is used for anti-counterfeiting, the counterfeiter may be discouraged from using arbitrary product codes, but may still have relatively easy access to a large number of genuine product codes and use them to make counterfeit products which would have little problem with the anti-counterfeiting measure.

[00071] In comparison, when at least a part of the product code is concealed, the counterfeiter will need to have real physical control over the product in order to gain access to the concealed product code. If the uncovering of the concealed code is further necessarily invasive to result in damaging or altering of the product code and/or the product, the

counterfeiter would not only have to have physical control over the product, but will also run risk of rendering the real product unsellable in order to make a counterfeit product.

[00072] FIGS. 3A-3C show an exemplary anti counterfeiting code using a mix of a barcode and an alphanumerical code. Except for the information coding scheme, the anti- counterfeiting method using the mixed code is largely similar to that using a plain numerical code as shown in FIG. 1 and FIGS. 2A-2D.

[00073] The mixed code 300 has a barcode 301c at the product-identifying code area 301 , and a plain numerical code 302c in the verification code area 302. The numerical code 302c is to be concealed. The barcode 301c can be read using a barcode scanner. The barcode 301c can be a typical barcode code containing encoded information.

[00074] FIG. 3B shows the mixed code 300 when it reproduced on the product. The numerical code 302c in the verification code area 302 is concealed using a concealment (e.g., scratch-off material) 332. The barcode 301c is still uncovered and can be read using a barcode scanner.

[00075] FIG. 3C shows the mixed code 300 with the concealment 332 removed to reveal the numerical code 302c. [00076] In the above embodiment, the barcode 301c alone may serve as a product- identifying code and be used to identify the product. The level of identification may have a desired specificity such as an individual product item level. It can be used for product- identification purposes or even a limited anti-counterfeiting purpose even without the help of the additional numerical code 302c. The numerical code 302c is added to serve as a verification code to verify the product-identifying barcode 301c.

[00077] The barcode 301c is created by encoding an alphanumerical code which itself is generated using a method similar to that for generating the product-identifying code 201c as described herein. The numerical code 302c is generated using a method similar to that for generating the confirmation code 202c as described herein. For example, the numerical code 302c can be either generated randomly or computed from the respective product-identifying alphanumerical code which is the basis for encoding the barcode 301c.

[00078] A process similar to that described in relation to FIGS. 2A-2C may be used for verifying the authenticity of the product-identifying code 301c and that of the product bearing the code. Here, however, because the information in the barcode 301c is encoded and not human-readable, it requires an appropriate reader to read the information contained therein. Typically, the reader may have a scanner and a built-in decoder. Alternatively, the reader does not decode the information, but instead sends the information to the verification center to be decoded. Most mobile phones today have barcode code reading capabilities.

[00079] FIGS. 4A-4C show an exemplary anti counterfeiting code using a 2-D code. The 2-D code 401c is a typical two-dimensional matrix code containing encoded information, and is suitable for use as a product-identifying code in the anticounterfeiting method in accordance with the present description. The amount of information that can be encoded into a 2-D code is much greater than a plain alphanumerical code or a ID barcode, including not only product identification information but also additional information such as product description, and manufacturer's company information. The verification code 402c, on the other hand, is a plain alphanumerical code (a four digit code as shown).

[00080] FIG. 4B shows the verification code 402c concealed using a removable material 432, leaving the 2-D product-identifying code 401c still visible.

[00081] FIG. 4C shows the concealment 432 removed to reveal the numerical code 402c.

[00082] The 2-D code 401 c is created by encoding an alphanumerical code which itself is generated using a method similar to that for generating the product-identifying code 201c as described herein. The verification code 402c is generated using a method similar to that for generating the confirmation code 202c as described herein. A process similar to that described in relation to FIGS. 2A-2C and/or FIGS. 3A-3C may be used for verifying the authenticity of the product-identifying code 401c and that of the product bearing the code.

[00083] In addition to the 1 -D and 2-D barcodes illustrated above, any other type of codes capable of identifying a product may be used as the product-identifying code. When RFID is used for such purpose, for example, the system may perform product tracking as a logistic function in addition to anti-counterfeiting.

[00084] The disclosed method allows flexibility in the arrangement of the overt product- identifying code and the covert verification code. In one embodiment, for example, the two codes is placed (e.g. printed) on the same layer of material, while the covert verification code is covered by a separate layer of concealment material. In another embodiment, the overt product-identifying code is placed on a first layer of a code-bearing medium, while the covert verification code placed on a second layer of code-bearing medium, and the two layers of code- bearing medium may or may not be made of the same material. In this latter arrangement, instead of using a separate concealment material such as a scratch-off layer, at least a part of the first layer of code-bearing medium may be used as a means to cover the second layer of code-bearing medium to conceal the verification code.

[00085] Furthermore, in the illustrated embodiments, the product-identifying code and the verification code are placed in different code regions and physically separated from each other. However, it is noted that this is only illustrative and not restrictive. It is feasible to place both codes in the same area overlapping with each other, but readable by different means.

[00086] Exemplary embodiments are employed to illustrate the concept and implementation of the present invention in this disclosure. The exemplary embodiments are only used for better understanding of the method and core concepts of the present invention. Based on the concepts in this disclosure, a technician of ordinary skills in the art may make some modifications. These modifications should also be under the scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. An anti-counterfeiting method comprising:

generating a plurality of product-identifying codes each identifying a unique item of a product;

generating a plurality of verification codes each being associated with a respective product-identifying code for verifying the respective product-identifying code;

allowing the plurality of product-identifying codes and the plurality of verification codes to be reproduced on or in the product, each product-identifying code and the associated verification code being reproduced on a respective unique item of the product identifiable by the product-identifying code; receiving at a verification center a product-identifying code found on a target item which is being checked for authenticity;

identifying the verification code associated with the received product-identifying code; and

allowing a comparison between the identified verification code with a verification code found on or in the target item in order to verify authenticity of the received product-identifying code.

2. The anti-counterfeiting method of claim 1, wherein identifying the verification code associated with the received product-identifying code comprises:

determining whether the received product-identifying code matches one of the plurality of product-identifying codes saved at a storage, and if affirmative, looking up the verification code in association with the matching product- identifying code.

3. The anti-counterfeiting method of claim 1, wherein identifying the verification code associated with the received product-identifying code comprises:

computing the verification code from the received product-identifying code using a hash function.

4. The anti-counterfeiting method of claim 1, wherein identifying the verification code associated with the received product-identifying code comprises:

determining whether the received product-identifying code matches one of the plurality of product-identifying codes saved at a storage, and if affirmative, computing the verification code from the matching product-identifying code using a hash function.

5. The anti-counterfeiting method of claim 1 , wherein generating the plurality of verification codes comprises generating a plurality of random codes each being used as a verification code.

6. The anti-counterfeiting method of claim 1 , wherein generating the plurality of verification codes comprises computing each verification code from the respective product-identifying code using a hash function.

7. The anti-counterfeiting method of claim 1, wherein generating the plurality of product- identifying codes comprises:

generating a plurality of structured codes each containing at least two code segments each containing one of product classification, manufacturer information, date information, a product serial number, a check digit, and packaging information.

8. The anti-counterfeiting method of claim 7, wherein the package information includes multitier packaging information.

9. The anti-counterfeiting method of claim 1, wherein generating the plurality of product-identifying codes comprises:

generating a plurality of structured codes each containing a plurality of code segments including one for product classification, one for date information, and one for a product serial number; and

computing the plurality of product-identifying codes from the plurality of structured codes using a hash function.

10. The anti-counterfeiting method of claim 1, wherein, when reproduced on or in the product, the product-identifying code is overt to normal reading or viewing, and the verification code is covert from normal reading or viewing and can only be conditionally revealed.

11. The anticounterfeiting method of claim 1 , wherein allowing a comparison between the identified verification code with a verification code found on or in the target item comprises:

receiving the verification code found on or in the target item at the verification center; and

determining whether the received verification code matches the identified verification code.

12. The anticounterfeiting method of claim I, wherein allowing a comparison between the identified verification code with a verification code found on or in the target item comprises:

sending the identified verification code to an authorized person who may compare the identified verification code with the verification code found on or in the target.

13. The anti-counterfeiting method of claim I , wherein reproducing the plurality of verification codes on the product comprises covering each verification code using a layer of removable material.

14. The anti-counterfeiting method of claim 1 , wherein the product-identifying code contains information no less than an equivalent of an alphanumerical code having a length of sixteen alphanumerical positions, and each of the plurality of verification codes contains information no greater than an equivalent of an alphanumerical code having a length of six alphanumerical positions.

15. The anti-counterfeiting method of claim 1, wherein the product-identifying code is received at the verification center wirelessly from a mobile device.

16. A computer- implemented method performed by one or more processors and communication channels for verifying authenticity of a product, the method comprising: acquiring a first code placed on or in a product item using a mobile device;

acquiring a second code placed on or in the product item using the mobile device; communicating the first code and the second code to a verification center; and receiving a verification result from the verification center, in response to communicating the first code and the second code, wherein the verification result is determined according to whether the second code matches a verification code associated with the first code.

17. The computer-implement method of claim 16, wherein the verification result is further determined according to whether the first code matches a product-identifying code stored in a storage accessible by the verification center.

18. The computer-implement method of claim 16, wherein the verification result comprises product information that is associated with a product-identifying code matching the first code.

19. The computer-implemented method of claim 16, wherein acquiring the first code comprises scanning the first code using the mobile device.

20. The computer-implement method of claim 16, wherein acquiring the second code comprises receiving the second code through a user input interface of the mobile device.

21. The computer-implement method of claim 16, wherein acquiring the first code, acquiring the second code, and receiving the verification code are performed in a software mobile application installed and run on the mobile device.

22. A computer- implemented method performed by one or more processors and communication channels for verifying authenticity of a product, the method comprising: acquiring using a mobile device a first code placed on or in a product item;

communicating the first code to a verification center;

receiving from the verification center, in response to communicating the first code, a verification code and product information associated with the first code to allow a user to determine whether the product item matches the product information received from the verification center, and whether the verification code received matches the second code placed on or in the product item.

23. An article comprising a non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions for causing one or more processors to perform operations comprising:

acquiring a first code placed on or in a product item using a mobile device;