EP1295262B1 - Method and apparatus for verifying the authenticity of documents - Google Patents

Description

The invention relates to methods and devices for checking the authenticity of documents, in particular banknotes, securities or security documents, according to the preamble of the independent claims.

The examination of the authenticity of documents is generally carried out by measuring certain authenticity features, for example optical, electrical or magnetic characteristics, on a document to be tested and subsequent testing of the measured authenticity features on the basis of predefined authenticity criteria. For example, as an authenticity feature, the optical reflection behavior of the document is measured and then checked as to whether the measured reflection behavior falls below or exceeds a specific threshold value as an associated authenticity criterion. Depending on the test result, the document is classified as genuine or incorrect.

An increase in falsification detection reliability can be achieved, inter alia, by tightening the authenticity criteria when checking certain authenticity features, for example by raising or lowering thresholds. In practice, however, the authenticity criteria can not be tightened arbitrarily, since otherwise the proportion of genuine documents not recognized as genuine - and possibly rejected or incorrectly classified - would become too high.

This would lead, for example, in banknote processing machines, which are used in particular in commercial banks for deposit verification and billing, to an increased effort in the manual and possibly further machine post-processing of not recognized as genuine banknotes.

In the case of authentication in automatic payment machines, a general tightening of the authenticity criteria would mean that, in particular, used or soiled genuine banknotes, in which the expression of the authenticity features against freshly printed banknotes is reduced due to soiling or damage, are not recognized as genuine and, as a result, depending on the application - be rejected or embossed as a forged counterfeit.

The reliability in detecting counterfeit banknotes is therefore limited by the required low proportion of real banknotes not recognized as genuine. This is particularly problematic when due to "soft" authenticity criteria counterfeits are not recognized as such and get back into circulation, for example, after depositing counterfeit banknotes to SB-recycling machines by a customer and subsequent issue of not identified as counterfeit notes to other customers ,

That from the DE 19618 541 A1 Known method relates to the determination of a sorting class from a number of banknote characteristics, such as denomination, security features and pollution. In this case, measurement results for the banknote properties are first mapped onto discrete classes and combined to form a class vector. The class vector is finally compared with individual rule vectors, each corresponding to a particular sort class. If the class vector of the banknote matches a rule vector, the banknote is assigned the sorting class corresponding to the respective rule vector. With this method, sorting classes can be determined quickly and precisely. The derivation of a class for individual security features, ie the actual authenticity check, however, takes place according to the methods known from the prior art, so that the problems described above also occur here: if, for example, the reliability increases by raising or lowering threshold values for authenticity features the authenticity is to be increased or decreased.

From the EP 0 101 115 A1 a device for detecting banknotes is known in which a digital image is taken from the banknote and compared with a previously stored comparison image of a reference banknote. If, in a first comparison, in particular on one half of the banknote, a sufficiently reliable result is not obtained, the comparison can be repeated - for example with other comparison values - in other areas of the banknote. This, however, opens up the possibility of deliberately contaminating or damaging security-relevant areas of a counterfeit banknote from causing an examination of other areas with possibly easier-to-imitate security features and thus - erroneously - to produce a positive test result

It is the object of the present invention to provide methods and devices for checking authenticity, with which documents with increased reliability can be checked, in particular without simultaneously increasing the proportion of false documents not actually recognized as genuine.

This object is achieved by the authenticity test according to claims 1 and

In the method for checking the authenticity according to claim 1, at least two different authenticity classes each having one or more. Authenticity criteria provided, wherein the individual authenticity classes differ from each other in at least one authenticity criterion. For authenticity testing, an authenticity class is selected from the different authentication classes depending on the determined condition of a document under review and the document is checked against the authenticity criteria of the selected authenticity class, whereby clean and undamaged documents with significantly stricter authenticity criteria are checked than heavily soiled or damaged documents. In this case, the selected authenticity class is assigned to the document if its authenticity criteria are met by the document. The authenticity criteria are, for example, threshold values or intervals for the authenticity features used for the test. As authenticity features, for example, optical, magnetic, electrical or physical characteristics can be used, eg optical reflection, transmission or emission, magnetic permeability, electrical conductivity, dielectric constant, thickness and format of the document as well as watermarks.

The invention is based on the idea to combine different authenticity criteria in the authentication of documents in several authenticity classes, the requirements for authenticity depending on the authenticity class are different levels, as belong to each authenticity class different severity criteria of authenticity. If, for example, an authenticity class with high requirements for authenticity is selected, for example with very high threshold values for the optical reflection or transmission, the authenticity of documents which fulfill the authenticity criteria of this selected authenticity class can be affirmed with high probability. Documents which do not meet the authenticity criteria of a selected authenticity class can be checked against further selected authenticity classes with lower requirements for authenticity, for example lower threshold values, whereby their authenticity can be affirmed with correspondingly lower probability. Overall, here-by a classification of the authenticity property, ie the measured authenticity features, of the documents to be tested into different classes of authenticity. By differentiating the result of the authenticity check, it is possible to determine those documents which are more likely to be true than the authenticity checking methods according to the prior art, as a result of which the reliability of the authenticity determination as a whole is increased. At the same time, the remaining documents can continue to be audited with the hitherto customary - generally "less stringent" - authenticity criteria, thus keeping the proportion of genuine documents not recognized as genuine low.

In a further development of the method it is provided that the denomination of the document is determined and then the selection of the authenticity class takes place as a function of the denomination of the document. The denomination is the value or currency of the document under review.

The condition of the document is generally given by state characteristics, such as degree of soiling, limpness, damage, such as cracks, holes or imperfections in the printed image, as well as foreign objects, such as adhesive strips. The selection of the authenticity class when checking the authenticity of a document is based on, for example, the degree of contamination of the document, whereby clean and undamaged documents with significantly stricter authenticity criteria, eg higher thresholds, are checked than heavily soiled or damaged documents. This significantly increases the reliability of counterfeit detection of clean or slightly soiled documents. Overall, this condition-based authentication can identify documents in very good condition with high reliability as true or false. Since this only At the same time, the proportion of documents that are not recognized as authentic remains low.

Part of the genuineness criteria used for the authenticity check can be determined on the basis of forged documents. As a result, the authenticity check with defined authenticity criteria is extended by an additional authenticity check with additional authenticity criteria, the additional authenticity criteria being determined on the basis of forged documents. The determination of the additional authenticity criteria is generally carried out in a separate method, e.g. in specially designed facilities where forged documents are examined in particular for characteristic differences to genuine documents. From the differences found additional authenticity criteria are determined, which are then fed to the authentication process. In this case, documents continue to be tested on the basis of fixed authenticity criteria and classified as genuine if the authenticity criteria are met. In addition, counterfeits can be detected if the documents examined do not meet the additional authenticity criteria established on known counterfeits, which preferably relate to characteristic differences between a found counterfeit and genuine documents. In this way, an increased reliability in the detection of counterfeiting, especially with regard to known and circulating counterfeits achieved.

Fig.1

den schematischen Aufbau einer Vorrichtung zur erfindungsgemäßen Echtheitsprüfung von Dokumenten;

Fig. 2

den schematischen Aufbau eines Systems zur Echtheitsprüfung anhand von an gefälschten Dokumenten ermittelten Echtheitskriterien und

Fig. 3

den schematischen Aufbau eines Systems zur Bearbeitung von einbezahlten Banknoten.

The invention will now be explained in more detail with reference to examples shown in FIGS. Show it

Fig.1

the schematic structure of a device for checking the authenticity of documents according to the invention;

Fig. 2

the schematic structure of a system for authentication on the basis of forged documents identified authenticity criteria and

Fig. 3

the schematic structure of a system for processing paid banknotes.

FIG. 1 shows the schematic structure of an apparatus for authenticity verification of documents according to the invention. The documents 10 provided in an input device 11, for example bank notes, are withdrawn individually from the input device 11 and conveyed by means of a transport system 14 to the output device 12. There, the documents 10 are sorted into three different sorting classes and output to corresponding output bins 13. On the way between input device 11 and output device 12, a document 10 to be tested is transported past a measuring device 15. In this case, the measuring device 15 measures the authenticity features of the document 10 to be checked. State features characterizing the state of the document 10 are also measured. The dashed line in the measuring device 15 is intended to indicate that the measuring device 15 may have two or optionally a plurality of subassemblies in which authenticity and state features can be measured separately. In principle, it is also possible to measure both authenticity and state characteristics together in a measuring device. In the example shown, the measuring device 15 is used to measure only one side of the document 10 to be tested. In general, however, the device can also be designed in this way be that the document 10 can be measured from both sides, for example by two oppositely arranged measuring devices 15 through which the document 10 is transported therethrough.

Information about the measured features in the measuring device 15 are transmitted to an evaluation device 16, in which the authenticity check according to the invention takes place. The selection of a certain authenticity class and their assignment to the document 10 to be checked is hereby preferably realized by a computer program. In the computer program, for example, it is checked whether an authenticity feature measured on the document 10 to be checked, e.g. the optical reflection is greater than an optical reflection threshold associated with the particular authenticity class. If the result of the test is positive, document 10 is assigned the particular authentication class, e.g. by writing a number identifying the authenticity class into a variable characterizing the authenticity of the document 10. If the test result is negative, the computer program sets the test of the measured authenticity feature based on lower thresholds belonging to other authenticity classes, i. less stringent authenticity criteria, and assigns document 10 a corresponding certificate of authenticity. Overall, this results in a classification of the fastness property, i. the measured authenticity features, the documents to be tested 10 in different authenticity classes instead. If all of these checks provide a negative check result, the document 10 is considered false.

In the method according to the invention, the state of the document 10 is additionally determined, for example, from the measured state features. The document 10 then preferably becomes one of several status classes which are characteristic for the respective state of the document to be checked are assigned. In the examination of banknotes here usually three state classes are provided, namely for a useless (unfit), useable (fit) or very good (ATM-fit) state. The selection of the authenticity class in the subsequent authenticity check then takes place as a function of the conditional class assigned to the document 10 to be checked. Here, banknotes in very good condition (ATM-fit) are subjected to very strict authenticity criteria, while banknotes in unusable or fit condition must meet less stringent authenticity criteria of other authenticity classes in order to be classified as genuine. In order to increase the reliability of the authenticity check, it is also possible here that an additional authenticity check is performed on documents 10 of a specific condition class, for example on banknotes in a usable (fit) or very good (ATM-fit) state. Such an additional authenticity check can be carried out, for example, on the basis of already measured data for individual authenticity features.

The determination of the denomination can in principle also take place via the measuring device 15 and the evaluation device 16, but if appropriate this can also be carried out in separate measuring and evaluation devices.

In a typical sorting mode, for example for use in a bank note processing machine for deposit verification and billing, the documents 10 are divided into one or more sorting classes and output to corresponding output bins 13. Here, the output device 12 is controlled by the evaluation device 16 so that in a first of the output compartments 13 banknotes - possibly of only one desired denomination - are issued, the very good (ATM-fit) State, to which an authenticity class with high demands on the authenticity, ie strict authenticity criteria, was assigned and which are in a desired position, ie a specific print pattern is visible from above and optionally aligned in a certain way. In a second output tray, the so-called reject tray, those banknotes are issued to which no authenticity class could be assigned and / or are in an undesirable location and / or may not belong to the desired denomination. If necessary, erroneously drawn in and / or transported banknotes, eg double copies or folded banknotes, are also dispensed into this output compartment. Finally, all remaining bills are issued to a third output bin, ie fit, unfit and banknotes, which have been assigned a passphrase with less stringent requirements for authenticity, ie less stringent authenticity criteria. If, for example, a stack of banknotes of a specific denomination is entered in a mixed position, then with this sorting mode, those banknotes of a particular denomination can be sorted out, which are in all probability real, have a very good condition (ATM-fit) and at the same time have a desired position. Banknotes meeting these criteria may then be provided for immediate reissue, eg in a self-service recycling machine.

FIG. 2 shows the schematic structure of a system for authentication on the basis of authenticity criteria, which were determined on counterfeit documents. The functioning of such a system differs from that in FIG. 1 illustrated example mainly by the fact that carried out in the evaluation device 16 authenticity check is carried out in two sub-steps. In a first sub-step, the authenticity check is carried out using - preferably classified into authenticity classes - Authenticity criteria. The selection of the authenticity class can here, as already in connection with FIG. 1 has been explained, depending on the determined state of the document 10 to be checked. If the measured authenticity features fulfill the given authenticity criteria, the document 10 is assigned the corresponding authenticity class. In a second sub-step of the authenticity check, an additional check is carried out using authenticity criteria which were determined on known forged documents. The determination of these authenticity criteria takes place here in suitable for this purpose banknote testing machines, eg in a central bank or at a corresponding service provider. For reasons of data reduction, these are preferably authenticity criteria which are characteristic of the difference between a forged and a genuine document. The authenticity criteria used in the second sub-step of the authenticity check are transmitted in the example shown by a control device 31, eg from a server of a central bank or a central service provider, via a wired or wireless connection 32 to one or more test stations 30 simultaneously. However, the transmission of the corresponding data can also be done by means of suitable data carriers, for example by flash card, memory modules, floppy, CD or DVD. If a corresponding characteristic difference is detected in the second partial step of the authenticity check, the document 10 can be identified as a counterfeit with a high degree of probability, even if it fulfills the authenticity criteria in the first partial step of the authenticity check. In principle, the chronological order of the two sub-steps can be chosen as desired.

Overall, this system allows a simple and fast update of features and criteria for checking the authenticity of banknotes in any number of test stations 30 simultaneously, so that a high reliability is ensured in the detection of counterfeit banknotes in circulation.

FIG. 3 shows the schematic structure of a system for applying the authenticity test according to the invention. Documents 10, in this example banknotes, are deposited by a depositor at a commercial bank 39. The deposit can be made, for example, at the terminal of a self-service recycling machine. In the inspection station 30, which may be part of the terminal, the banknotes are checked for authenticity. If the bills meet the very strict authenticity criteria of a selected authenticity class, they may be provided for immediate further issue, for example at the same terminal, at other issuing terminals 34 and / or at a bank counter 36. All banknotes which do not meet these very strict authenticity criteria are supplied to a central checking device 35, for example in a central bank 40, in order to be subjected to a further authenticity check, whereby so-called high-security features are also used there for the purpose of checking particularly reliable recognition counterfeit banknotes is guaranteed. Banknotes meeting these criteria can now be re-circulated by being returned to a commercial bank 39 for disbursement at issuing terminals 34 or at a bank counter 36.

In this example, a control unit 31 is also provided, in which - as in the description to FIG. 2 specifying additional authenticity criteria based on counterfeit banknotes which relate to characteristic differences between genuine banknotes and banknotes detected as counterfeit in the central checking device 35. The counterfeits can in this case be transmitted directly from the test device 35 to the control unit 31. The authenticity criteria determined there are then transmitted via the connection 32 to the test station 30 and can there - possibly additionally in addition to the authenticity criteria divided into different authenticity classes - be used to check the authenticity of banknotes.

In addition, in order to enable tracing of paid counterfeits, characteristic data, e.g. Printed images and / or serial numbers, to the banknotes deposited together with data to the depositor, e.g. Account number and / or personal identification number (PIN), are stored together in the control device 31. If a banknote is detected as a counterfeit in the central checking device 35, characteristic data, e.g. Print images and / or serial numbers, the banknote transmitted to the control device 31. There can be identified by comparing the stored with the transmitted data of the depositor of the counterfeit bill. The control unit 31 can either be installed inside the commercial bank 39 as shown or outside of it, for example at a central service provider.

This in FIG. 3 The illustrated system exemplifies the application of the inventive method in the authentication of banknotes to a deposit machine of a commercial bank. In principle, however, the authenticity check can also take place in a banknote processing machine in which banknotes-for example, after payment at the counter of a commercial bank-are entered by an employee for checking and / or sorting. The authenticity check and the subsequent procedure during sorting, re-issuing and / or forwarding for checking in a central bank are carried out analogously.

Claims (21)

1. A method for checking the authenticity of documents, wherein a document (10) is checked using authenticity criteria, whereby at least two different authenticity classes with respectively one or several authenticity criteria are provided, whereby the individual authenticity classes mutually differ in at least one authenticity criterion, and whereby the requirements for authenticity vary in strictness depending on the authenticity class, characterized in that

   - the condition of the document (10) is ascertained, and subsequently an authenticity class is selected from the different authenticity classes, whereby the selection of the authenticity class is effected in dependence on the condition of the document (10), and the document (10) is checked using the authenticity criteria of the selected authenticity class, whereby clean and undamaged documents are checked with substantially stricter authenticity criteria than strongly soiled or damaged documents, and

   - the document (10) is assigned the selected authenticity class when the authenticity criteria thereof are fulfilled by the document (10).
2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that upon non-fulfillment of the authenticity criteria of the selected authenticity class, a further authenticity class is selected and the authenticity check is repeated using the authenticity criteria of the selected further authenticity class.
3. The method according to either of the above claims, characterized in that the denomination of the document (10) is ascertained and subsequently the selection of the authenticity class is effected in dependence on the denomination of the document (10).
4. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that the condition of the document (10) is dividable into condition classes, the document (10) is assigned a condition class corresponding to the condition, and the selection of the authenticity class for checking the authenticity of the document (10) is effected in dependence on the condition class assigned to the document (10).
5. The method according to any of the above claims, characterized in that the individual documents (10) are sorted in accordance with the respectively assigned authenticity class.
6. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that the individual documents (10) are additionally sorted in accordance with their condition, optionally their condition class, and/or their denomination.
7. The method according to either of claims 5 and 6, characterized in that the documents (10) are sorted and thereby divided into one or several sorting classes, whereby there are divided into a first sorting class those documents (10) that have a very good condition, have been assigned a certain authenticity class, and are in a desired orientation and/or belong to a desired denomination.
8. The method according to claim 7, characterized in that there are divided into a second sorting class those documents (10) that have not been assigned any of the authenticity classes and/or that are not in the desired orientation and/or that do not belong to a desired denomination.
9. The method according to claim 8, characterized in that there are divided into a third sorting class all remaining documents (10) that are not divided into the first or second sorting class.
10. The method according to any of claims 7 to 9, characterized in that the documents (10) divided into the first sorting class are made available for a further immediate use.
11. The method according to either of claims 9 to 10, characterized in that the documents (10) divided into the third sorting class are transmitted to a checking device (35) and subjected there to a further authenticity check, in particular using further authenticity criteria.
12. The method according to claim 11, characterized in that those documents (10) checked in the central checking device (35) are made available for a further use that have a good or very good condition and fulfill the authenticity criteria of the authenticity check in the central checking unit (35).
13. The method according to any of the above claims, characterized in that the documents (10) are input by a depositor and supplied to the authenticity check, and that data identifying the depositor as well as characteristic data of the input documents (10) are stored together.
14. The method for checking the authenticity of documents according to any of the above claims, characterized in that at least a portion of the authenticity criteria drawn on for the authenticity check is ascertained using forged documents (10).
15. The method according to claim 14, characterized in that the authenticity check is carried out in a checking station (30), and the ascertainment of at least a portion of the authenticity criteria drawn on for the authenticity check in the checking station (30) is effected using forged documents (10) in a control device (31).
16. The method according to claim 15, characterized in that information about the authenticity criteria ascertained using forged documents (10) is transferred from the control device (31) to the checking station (30).
17. The method according to claim 16, characterized in that the information transferred by the control device (31) to the checking station (30) relates to characteristic differences between a forged and an authentic document (10).
18. An apparatus for checking the authenticity of documents, in particular bank notes, value documents or security documents, having

    - at least one measuring device (15) for measuring at least one authenticity feature on a document (10) to be checked, and

    - at least one evaluation device (16) for checking the measured authenticity feature using authenticity criteria,
    whereby the evaluation device (16) is configured for checking the authenticity of the document (10) using authenticity criteria of an authenticity class selected from several different authenticity classes, whereby the authenticity classes respectively comprise one or several authenticity criteria and mutually differ in at least one authenticity criterion, and whereby the requirements for authenticity vary in strictness depending on the authenticity class, characterized in that

    - the measuring device (15) is configured for measuring at least one condition feature which characterizes the condition of a document (10) to be checked, and the evaluation device (16) is configured for determining the condition of the document (10) from the measured condition feature and for selecting the authenticity class in dependence on the determined condition of the document (10), whereby clean and undamaged documents are checked with substantially stricter authenticity criteria than strongly soiled or damaged documents, and

    - the document (10) is assigned the selected authenticity class when the authenticity criteria thereof are fulfilled by the document (10).
19. The apparatus according to claim 18, characterized in that an output device (12) is provided for outputting documents (10) sorted according to their authenticity class and/or their condition and/or their denomination.
20. The apparatus according to either of claims 18 to 19, characterized in that the evaluation device (16) is configured for checking the authenticity of the document (10) using authenticity criteria that are ascertained using forged documents (10).
21. The apparatus according to claim 20, characterized in that there is provided a control device (31) which is configured for ascertaining the authenticity criteria using forged documents (10) and from which information about the authenticity criteria ascertained using forged documents (10) is transferable to the evaluation device (16).

Images