Sounds like Iris is becoming an overall preferred choice, even if not the most common one deployed. One drawback to Iris though I can see is probably a need for two readers, one high and one low, to make it easier for people of different heights and ADA (wheelchair, for example) accessibility.
Full disclosure... I work for a company that manufactures iris recognition products, EyeLock.
Although I have seen at least one site where multiple readers were mounted at different heights, typical applications today use a single reader on the wall beside the door to accommodate individuals of various heights as well as ADA compliance. Individuals either look up, down, or straight at the reader and in some instances the reader can be adjusted manually or automatically for the shortest and tallest individuals.
I don't like fingerprint, it's not consistently reliable enough. I do a fair amount of woodworking, and while I always have my fingers when I'm done for the day, I often don't have fingerprints for about a week until they grow back. That works, doesn't work seesaw is annoying.
Anyone that has ever had or currently has a Pre- iPhone X surely knows frustrating the thumb scan is. I just don’t think finger print biometrics has much of a future based on my experience and those listed in the article. I am guessing people like it because it is the least expensive of the major biometric technologies. I am convinced that retina scan and facial recognition is the future, especially since facial recognition requires no special hardware other than a multi mega pixel surveillance camera.
Idemia's MorphoWave touchless fingerprint reader reads all 4 fingers of each hand. Enrollment takes less than 30 seconds for both hands. Very impressive technology. A smaller less expensive unit was released at ISC.
I was impressed by that device also. Quick enrollment, response time, touchless, and probably a lot more reliable with the combined fingers versus trying to press one finger. I haven't had a chance to followup with them on a phone call but my only concern will be price.
I am strongly prejudiced against retinal scanners. This is because I had to use one at work. I have significant astigmatism. This made it difficult to get enrolled (it took forever to get two consistent readings). Then in practice the reader would rarely match me to my enrolled eyeball. Usually, staff would just buzz me through, based on their recognition of my face. Granted this was 25 years ago. Does anyone know if there's been any improvements on this score in the interim. Astigmatism is not that rare.
Thanks for sharing. This seems to be a drawback of many biometrics - human physiology changes over time, sometimes frequently.
In a related way, I remember reading about collagen decay in the elderly and about this making fingerprints 'flatter' over time, and even if wear or injury isn't a factor, it can be difficult to read fingerprints in that age group.
I work a desk job and am a two finger typist. For some reason last time I got fingerprinted as a vendor for a background check it was either my left ring or middle finger took 5 tries for fingerprinting. My right middle finger took six tries before they hit the override to accept the print anyways. I know a fingerprinting system may be different than a finger "reading" systems, but still made me think how troublesome prints can be. At the very least if a biometric does not work for a person, you can always install a reader as a backup and I believe restrict only certain people to use that reader. So maybe not as secure as everyone being forced to use a biometric at that portal, but still more secure if it's only 1 out of say 50 people permitted using prox instead of a biometric than everyone using prox.
Just move all this to a phone based credential, linking it with the services provided by the phone. Then a person can use either a pin, gesture, biometric or whatever the phone offers. And you could implement the MFA requirement on a by person, by door basis. You get more granularity & eliminate the costly hardware at the door.
Speed and ease are important to users. I always thought (and get feedback from talking with some potential clients) about phones being a backup if you forgot or loose your prox credential. People don't like leaving NFC on if it means faster battery drain or taking out their phone or waiting for it to link when they walk up to a door. If it's a higher security area like maybe a pharmacy door in a hospital, they may be more agreeable to that.