MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985103528 · doi:10.1109/pst.2010.5593246

Security of Error Correcting Code for biometric Encryption

2010· article· en· W1985103528 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBiometric Identification and Security
Canadian institutionsPrivacy Analytics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEncryptionBiometricsTheoretical computer scienceGeneralizationCode (set theory)CryptographyHadamard transformAlgorithmError detection and correctionKey (lock)Block (permutation group theory)Relation (database)Computer securityMathematicsData miningProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The importance of security of BE systems in relation to an Error Correcting Code (ECC) is emphasized. The security of the BE system proposed in Kanade et al paper “Three Factor Scheme For Biometric-Based Cryptographic Key Regeneration Using Iris” is analyzed. It is shown that the error correcting scheme with zero insertions, which was employed in the paper, can be easily cracked by an attacker. By knowing the locations of only 7 zeros for each 32-bit block of the Hadamard ECC, an attacker can reconstruct the entire 198-bit key within a fraction of a second. The generalization of the attack for the ECCs other than Hadamard is discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.749
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiometric Identification and SecurityFrench-language works237,207