14em1d4702 PDF

FAKE BIOMETRIC DETECTION USING SOFTWARE
BASED LIVENESS DETECTION TECHNIQUE
A THESIS REPORT
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement to
JAWAHARLAL NEHRU TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY KAKINADA
For the Award of the Degree of

Master of Technology
in
Communication Systems
Submitted by
K. APARNA JYOTHI
(Regd. No: 14EM1D4702)
Under the Esteemed Guidance of
Mr. K.VENKATESULU, M.Tech.,

Assistant Professor in ECE
DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRONICS & COMMUNICATION

ENGINEERING
SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

Accredited by NAAC with A Grade
(Approved by A.I.C.T.E & Affiliated to JNTUK Kakinada)
Seetharampuram, Narsapur-534280,
West Godavari (Dt.), A.P.
2015-2016
DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRONICS & COMMUNICATION
ENGINEERING
SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
Accredited by NAAC with A Grade

(Approved by A.I.C.T.E & Affiliated to JNTU Kakinada)
Seetharampuram, Narsapur-534280,
West Godavari (Dt.), A.P.
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that this dissertation work entitled Fake Biometric
Detection Using Software based Liveness Detection Technique being

submitted by K. APARNA JYOTHI (14EM1D4702) in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the award of Master of Technology with COMMUNICATION
SYSTEMS as specialization is a record of bonafide work carried out by him, during
the academic year 2015 2016.
Project Guide Head of the Department

Mr. K.Venkatesulu, M.Tech., Mr.V.Srinivas, M.Tech., (Ph.D)
Assistant Professor, ECE Associate Professor, ECE
EXTERNAL EXAMINER
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The satisfaction that accompanies the successful completion of every task

during my dissertation would be incomplete without the mention of the people who
made it possible. I consider it my privilege to express my gratitude and respect to all
who guided, inspired and helped me in completion of my project work.
I extend my heartfelt gratitude to the Almighty for giving me strength in

proceeding with this project titled Fake Biometric Detection Using Software Based
Liveness Detection Technique.
I owe my special thanks to Dr. S. Ramesh Babu, M.Tech.,Ph.D., Secretary

& Correspondent,Swarnandhra College of Engineering and Technology,
Seetharampuram for providing necessary arrangements to carry out this project.
I express my heartfelt thanks to Dr.T.Madhu, M.Tech., Ph.D.FIE.,MISTE,

Principal, Swarnandhra College of Engineering & Technology, Seetharampuram for
giving me this opportunity for the successful completion of my degree.
I would like to express my sincere thanks to Mr.V.Srinivas,M.Tech.(Ph.D).,

Associate Professor & Head of the Department of ECE for his valuable suggestions
at the time of need.
I record with pleasure, of my gratitude to my Project guide

Mr.K.Venkatesulu, M.Tech., Assistant Professor, ECE for his simulating guidance
and valuable suggestions throughout the project.
I am very much grateful to our M.Tech Coordinator Mr.S.Ravichand,

M.Tech.(Ph.D)., Associate professor for giving the encouragement that helped me to
complete the project successfully.
I would like to express my profound sense of gratitude to all the coordinators

and faculty members for their cooperation and encouragement throughout my course.
Above all, I thank my parents. I feel deep sense of gratitude for my family
who formed part of my vision. Finally I thank one and all that have contributed
directly or indirectly to this thesis.
K.Aparna jyothi
(14EM1D4702)
i
ABSTRACT
Biometrics-based authentication systems offer obvious usability advantages

over traditional password and token-based authentication schemes. However,
biometrics raises several privacy concerns. A biometric is permanently associated
with a user and cannot be changed. Hence, if a biometric identifier is compromised,
it is lost forever and possibly for every application where the biometric is used.
Moreover, if the same biometric is used in multiple applications, a user can
potentially be tracked from one application to the next by cross-matching biometric
databases. In this PROJECT, we demonstrate several methods to generate multiple
cancelable identifiers from fingerprint images to overcome these problems.
Designing of a novel software-based fake detection method that can be used in
multiple biometric systems to detect different types of fraudulent access attempts.
We outlined several advances that originated both from the cryptographic and
biometric community to address this problem. In particular, we outlined the
advantages of cancelable biometrics over other approaches and presented a case
study of different techniques.This project can be enhanced by reducing the image
using DTCWT. This modification can decrease the image size and execution can be
reduced by enhancing the image clarity. This enhancement can be shown using
PSNR values.
The experimental results, obtained on publicly available data sets of

fingerprint, iris, and 2D face, show that the proposed method is highly competitive
compared with other state-of-the-art approaches and that the analysis of the general
image quality of real biometric samples reveals highly valuable information that may
be very efficiently used to discriminate them from fake traits.
ii
LIST OF CONTENTS
Name Of The Content Page No.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT i
ABSTRACT ii
LIST OF CONTENTS iii
LIST OF FIGURES v
LIST OF TABLES vi
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 INTRODUCTION 2
1.2 AIM AND OBJECTIVES 3
1.3 LITERATURE SURVEY 4
1.4 ORGANISATION REPORT 5

CHAPTER 2: EXISTING SYSTEM 6
2.1 EXISTING SYSTEM 7
2.2 DRAWBACKS OF EXISTING SYSTEM 8
2.2.1 Duplication with co-operation 8
2.2.2 Duplication without Co-operation 9
CHAPTER 3: PROPOSED SYSTEM 12
3.1 BIOMETRIC AUTHENTICATION 12
3.2 FINGER PRINT RECOGNIZATION 15
3.2.1 Different patterns 15
3.2.2 Minutia features 16
3.3 IRIS 18
3.3.1 Iris image enhancement 18
3.3.2 Iris image Binarization 19
3.3.3 Iris Image Segmentation 19
3.4 MINUTIA Extraction 19
3.4.1 Iris Ridge Thinning 19
3.4.2 Enhanced Thinning 20
3.4.3Enhanced thinning algorithm 21
3.5 FACE RECOGNITION 21
CHAPTER 4: IMPLEMENTATION OF PROJECT 24
iii
4.1 LIVENESS ASSESSMENT IN AUTHENTICATION SYSTEM 25
4.2 SOFTWARE-BASED TECHNIQUES 25
4.3 IMAGE QUALITY ASSESSMENT FOR LIVENESS
26
DETECTION
4.4 FULL-REFERENCE IQ MEASURES 28
4.4.1 Different types FR-IQ Measurements 30
4.5 NO-REFERENCE IQ MEASURES 33
4.6 DUAL TREE COMPLEX WAVELETS TRANSFORM 36
CHAPTER 5: SOFTWARE ASPECTS 39
5.1 INTRODUCTION TO MATLAB 40
CHAPTER 6: RESULTS 47
6.1 TOP MODULE 48
6.2 INPUT PROCESS WINDOW 49
6.3 IDENTIFICATION PROCESS 50
6.4 IQA PARAMETERS 51
6.5 FINAL RESULT 52
6.6 Advantages 53
6.7 Applications 53
CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION & FUTURE SCOPE 54
7.1 CONCLUSION 55
7.2 FUTURE SCOPE 55
REFERENCES 56
BIBLIOGRAPHY 59
APPENDIX 61
iv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Name Of The Figure Page No.

2.1 software-based liveness detection 7
2.2 A Stamp type dummy finger print 9
2.3 A wafer-thin silicon dummy fingerprint 9
3.1 Block diagram of Biometric system 13
3.2(a) The Arch Pattern 15
3.2(b) The Loop Pattern 16
3.2(c) The Whirl pattern 16
3.3(a) Ridge Ending 17
3.3(b) Bifurcation 17
3.3(c) Short Ridge 17
3.4 Iris Real and Fake Images 19
4.1 Block diagram for the proposed system 25
4.2 Classification Of Image Quality Measures 28
4.3 Block diagram for a 3-level DTCWT 36
5.1 Example image (f) 41
5.2 Example picture (rice.png) 45
6.1 Top Module 49
6.2 Input Process Window 50
6.3 Identification Process 51
6.4 Measured IQ Parameters 52
6.5 Final Result 53
v
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Name of the Table Page No.
4.1 Different parameters measured for an image 35

4.2 Imtool 46
vi
FAKE BIOMETRIC DETECTION USING SOFTWARE BASED LIVENESS DETECTION
TECHNIQUE
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY Page 1

TECHNIQUE
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Biometrics refers to metrics related to human characteristics. Biometrics

authentication (or realistic authentication) is used in computer science as a form of
identification and access control. It is also used to identify individuals in groups that
are under surveillance. Biometric identifiers are the distinctive, measurable
characteristics used to label and describe individuals. Biometric identifiers are often
categorized as physiological versus behavioural characteristics. Physiological
characteristics are related to the shape of the body. Examples include, but are not
limited to fingerprint, palm veins, face recognition, DNA, palm print, hand geometry,
iris recognition, retina and odour/scent.
Behavioural characteristics are related to the pattern of behaviour of a person,

including but not limited to typing rhythm, gait, and voice. Some researchers have
said that the term behaviour metrics is used to describe the latter class of biometrics.
More traditional means of access control include token-based identification systems,
such as a driver's license or passport, and knowledge-based identification systems,
such as a password or personal identification number.
Since biometric identifiers are unique to individuals, so they provide high

reliability in verifying the identity than token and knowledge-based methods;
however, the collection of biometric identifiers raises privacy concerns about the
ultimate use of this information. Securing information and ensuring the privacy of
personal identities is a growing concern in todays society. Traditional authentication
schemes primarily utilize tokens or depend on some secret knowledge possessed by
the user for verifying his or her identity.
Biometrics-based authentication schemes using fingerprints, face recognition,

etc., overcome these limitations while offering usability advantages and are therefore
rapidly extending traditional authentication schemes. However, despite its obvious
advantages, the use of biometrics raises several security and privacy concerns as
outlined below:

TECHNIQUE
Biometrics is authentic but not secret: Unlike passwords and cryptographic

keys that are known only to the user, biometrics such as voice, face, signature, and
even fingerprints can be easily recorded and potentially misused without the users
consent. There have been several instances where artificial fingerprints have been
used to circumvent biometric security systems. Face and voice biometrics are
similarly vulnerable to being captured without the users explicit knowledge. In
contrast, tokens and knowledge have to be willingly shared by the user to be
compromised.
Biometrics cannot be revoked or cancelled. Passwords, PINs, etc., can be

reset if compromised. Tokens such as credit cards and badges can be replaced if
stolen. However, biometrics is permanently associated with the user and cannot be
revoked or replaced if compromised. While a user can successively enrol different
fingerprints, there is still a limited choice of fingers to choose from. This choice does
not exist for other biometric modalities.
If once the Biometric is lost, it is compromised forever, why because

Biometrics provides usability advantages that it obviates the need to remember and
manage multiple passwords and identities. However, this also means that if a
biometric is compromised in one application, essentially all applications where the
particular biometric is used are compromised. Cross-matching can be used to track
individuals without their permission. Since the same biometric might be used for
various applications and locations, the user can potentially be tracked if
organizations share their respective biometric databases. So in order to provide
security from this type of hackers, the traditional authentication schemes are used; by
using this scheme the user can maintain different identities/passwords to prevent this
hacking. The fact that a biometric remains the same presents a privacy concern.
1.2 AIM & OBJECTIVES:
We demonstrate several methods to generate multiple cancellable identifiers

from fingerprint images to overcome the hacking techniques. Designing of a novel
software-based fake detection method that can be used in multiple biometric systems
to detect different types of fraudulent access attempts. We outlined several advances
that originated both from the cryptographic and biometric community to address this
problem. In particular, here we mentioned the advantages of cancellable biometrics

TECHNIQUE
over other approaches and presented a case study of different techniques. This
project can be enhanced by reducing the image using DTCWT (Dual Tree Complex
Wavelet Transform).
The objective of this project is modification can decrease the image size and
execution can be reduced by enhancing the image clarity.
1.3 LITERATURE SURVEY:
After Rathaetal. formally defined the problem of cancellable biometrics (also

called revocable biometrics), many alternate solutions have emerged from both the
biometric and cryptographic community. We loosely divide the prior work into the
following categories
Biometric salting: This is similar to password salting in conventional crypto-

systems. In this approach, before hashing the password P of the user, it is
concatenated with a pseudorandom string S and the resulting hash is stored
in the database. The addition of the random sequence increases the entropy
and, therefore, the security of the password. Biometric salting is based on the
same principle. In some instances, the new representation is quantized to
derive robust binary cryptographic keys. However, the quantization is
practical only because of the additional entropy introduced through the salt.In
this category the defining feature is the addition of user-specific random
information to increase the entropy of the biometric template.
Biometric key generation: In this approach, a key is derived directly from the
biometric signal. The advantage is that there is no need for user-specific keys
or tokens as required by biometric salting methods and that it is therefore
scalable. A key, parameterized by the biometric B, is stored instead of the
actual biometric itself.The major problem with this approach is achieving
error tolerance in the key. The defining feature of this category is the attempt
to derive robust binary representations (keys) from noisy biometric data
without the use of additional information.
Fuzzy schemes: Another approach for constructing cancellable templates

involves the use of public auxiliary information P (also called helper data,
shielding functions, or fuzzy extractors), which is combined with biometric
information to reduce the intra user variation. The following is the defining
feature of this category: The schemes define a metric (e.g., Hamming,

TECHNIQUE
Euclidian, set distance, etc.) on noisy biometric data B and B0. Among the
different threats analyzed, the so-called direct or spoofing attacks have
motivated the biometric community to study the vulnerabilities against this
type of fraudulent actions in modalities such as the iris, the fingerprint, the
face, the signature, or even the gait and multimodal approaches.
1.4 ORGANISATION REPORT:
This thesis consists of total SEVEN chapters that include introduction and
conclusions. Chapter 2 describes about existing system. in chapter 3 conceptual
analysis of proposed system.chapter 4 having implementation of project. chapter 5
describes software aspects. Chapter 6 result analysis. in chapter 7 advantages and
applications are discussed.

TECHNIQUE
CHAPTER-2
EXISTING SYSTEM

TECHNIQUE
CHAPTER 2
EXISTING SYSTEM
2.1 EXISTING SYSTEM:
In recent years, the increasing interest in the evaluation of biometric systems

security has led to the creation of numerous and very diverse initiatives focused on
Biometric systems. Among the different threats analyzed, the so-called direct or
spoofing attacks have motivated the biometric community to study the vulnerabilities
against this type of fraudulent actions in modalities such as the iris, the fingerprint,
the face, the signature, or even the gait and multimodal approaches. In these attacks,
the intruder uses some type of synthetically produced artefact (e.g., gummy finger,
printed iris image or face mask), or tries to mimic the behaviour of the genuine user
(e.g., gait, signature), to fraudulently access the biometric system. As these types of
attacks are performed in the analog domain and the interaction with the device is
done following the regular protocol, the usual digital protection mechanisms (e.g.,
encryption, digital signature or watermarking) are not effective.
Besides other anti-spoofing approaches such as the use of multi biometrics or
challenge-response methods, special attention has been paid by the users to the
liveness detection techniques, which use different physiological properties to
distinguish between real and fake traits. Biometrics-based authentication systems
offer obvious usability advantages over traditional password and token-based
authentication schemes. However, biometrics raises several privacy concerns. A
biometric is permanently associated with a user and cannot be changed.
Fig 2.1: Types of attacks detected by hardware-based & software-based liveness detection

TECHNIQUE
Liveness detection methods are usually classified into one of two groups shown in
figure 2.1.
(i) Hardware-based techniques, which add some specific device to the sensor in
order to detect particular properties of a living trait (e.g., fingerprint sweat,
blood pressure, or specific reflection properties of the eye).
(ii) Software-based techniques, in this case the fake trait is detected once the
sample has been acquired with a standard sensor (i.e., features used to
distinguish between real and fake traits are extracted from the biometric
sample, and not from the trait itself).
The two types of methods present certain advantages and drawbacks over the
other and, in general, a combination of both would be the most desirable protection
approach to increase the security of biometric systems.
2.2 DRAWBACKS OF EXISTING SYSTEM:
In the existing system we are using hardware techniques for implementing
biometrics. In Hardware-based techniques, which add some specific device to the
sensor in order to detect particular properties of a living trait (e.g., fingerprint sweat,
blood pressure, or specific reflection properties of the eye), as a coarse comparison,
hardware-based schemes usually present a higher fake detection rate. Furthermore, as
they operate directly on the acquired sample (and not on the biometric trait itself),
and the drawbacks in existing system are
More costlier,
More complexity,
High computational delay,
Harmful to the human.

And also in hardware Biometric systems one can easily misuse the system by
creating fake or dummy fingerprints and dummy face masks etc. for example
creation of dummy finger prints are explained below:
Dummy fingerprints can be created in two ways (i) Duplication without Co-operation
(ii) Duplication with Co-operation.
2.2.1 Duplication without Co-operation:
For duplication of a fingerprint without co-operation of the original
person it is necessary to obtain a print of the finger from a glass or another
surface. One of the best ways to obtain such a print could be the fingerprint
scanner itself. If the scanner is cleaned before a person will be using it, an
almost perfect print is left on the scanner surface since people tend to press
their finger (which is the verification finger!) firmly on the scanner. Some

TECHNIQUE
more expertise is required to create a dummy from such a print, but every
dental technician has the skills and equipment to create one. This is an
accurate description of how to create a dummy of the fingerprint. A picture of
a stamp that is created using this method can be found in Figure 2.
Fig 2.2 A stamp type dummy finger print
2.2.2 Duplication with Co-operation:

Duplication of a fingerprint with co-operation of its owner is an
easiest method since it is possible to compare the dummy with the original
fingerprint in all aspects and adapt it accordingly. First, a plaster cast of the
finger is created. This cast is then filled with silicon rubber to create a wafer-
thin silicon dummy. This dummy can be glued to anyone's finger without it
being noticeable to the eye. So one can easily create the dummy finger and
can get the information without the intervention of original user. It follows
that creation of this type of dummy is possible with very limited means
within a few hours.
Fig 2.3: A wafer-thin silicon dummy fingerprint
To overcome this drawbacks, we demonstrate several methods to generate

multiple cancelable identifiers from fingerprint images, that is Software Based
techniques are used, in this case the fake trait is detected once the sample has been

TECHNIQUE
acquired with a standard sensor (i.e., features used to distinguish between real and
fake traits are extracted from the biometric sample, and not from the trait itself). In
this several advances that originated both from the cryptographic and biometric
community to address this problem.
As a comparison, hardware-based schemes usually present a higher fake
detection rate, while software-based techniques are in general less expensive (as no
extra device is needed), and less intrusive since their implementation is transparent to
the user. Furthermore, as they operate directly on the acquired sample (and not on the
biometric trait itself), software-based techniques may be embedded in the feature
extractor module which makes them potentially capable of detecting other types of
illegal break-in attempts not necessarily classified as spoofing attacks. For instance,
software-based methods can protect the system against the injection of reconstructed
or synthetic samples into the communication channel between the sensor and the
feature extractor.

TECHNIQUE
CHAPTER 3
PROPOSED SYSTEM

TECHNIQUE
CHAPTER 3
PROPOSED SYSTEM
The Proposed project can be enhanced from the existing technique by

reducing the image using DTCWT (Dual Tree Complex Wavelet Transform). This
modification can decrease the image size and execution can be reduced by enhancing
the image clarity. This enhancement can be shown using PSNR (Peak Signal to
Noise Ratio) values and provides high security to biometrics from the fake users.
3.1 BIOMETRIC AUTHENTICATION:
Many different aspects of human physiology, chemistry or behaviour can be
used for biometric authentication. The selection of a particular biometric for use in a
specific application involves a weighting of several factors. Jain et al. (1999)
identified seven different factors which are used when assessing the suitability of any
trait for use in biometric authentication. Universality means that every person using a
system should possess the trait. Uniqueness means the trait should be sufficiently
different for individuals in the relevant population such that they can be
distinguished from one another. Permanence relates to the manner in which a trait
varies over time. More specifically, a trait with 'good' permanence will be reasonably
invariant over time with respect to the specific matching algorithm. Measurability
(collectability) is nothing but ease of acquisition or measurement of the trait.
In addition, acquired data should be in a form that permits subsequent
processing and extraction of the relevant feature sets. Performance relates to the
accuracy, speed, and robustness of technology used (see performance section for
more details). Acceptability relates to how well individuals in the relevant population
accept the technology such that they are willing to have their biometric trait captured
and assessed. Circumvention relates to the ease with which a trait might be imitated
using an artifact or substitute.
The block diagram illustrates the two basic modes of a biometric system
First, in verification (or authentication) mode the system performs a one-to-one
comparison of a captured biometric with a specific template stored in a biometric
database in order to verify the individual is the person they claim to be. Three steps
are involved in the verification of a person.
This process may use a smart card, username or ID number (e.g. PIN) to

TECHNIQUE
indicate which template should be used for comparison 'Positive recognition' is a

common use of the verification mode, "where the aim is to prevent multiple people
from using same identity.
Fig 3.1 Block diagram of Biometric system
In the first step, reference models for all the users are generated and stored
in the model database.

In the second step, some samples are matched with reference models to
generate the genuine and impostor scores and calculate the threshold.

Third step is the testing step.
Second is the identification mode, in identification mode the system

performs a one-to-many comparison against a biometric database whether the
given image is original or not (fake image). The system will succeed in identifying
the individual if the comparison of the biometric sample to a template in the
database falls within a previously set threshold. Identification mode can be used
either for 'positive recognition' (so that the user does not have to provide any
information about the template to be used) or for 'negative recognition' of the
person "where the system establishes whether the person is who she (implicitly or
explicitly) denies to be".
The latter function can only be achieved through biometrics since other
methods of personal recognition such as passwords, PINs or keys are ineffective.

TECHNIQUE
The first time an individual uses a biometric system is called enrollmen1t. During
the enrolment, biometric information from an individual is captured and stored. In
subsequent uses, biometric information is detected and compared with the
information stored at the time of enrolment. Note that it is crucial that storage and
retrieval of such systems themselves be secure if the biometric system is to be
robust.
In the block diagram of Biometric system, the first block (sensor) is the
interface between the real world and the system; it has to acquire all the necessary
data. It is an image acquisition system, but it can change according to the
characteristics desired.
The second block performs all the necessary pre-processing: it has to
removing background noise from the sensor, to enhance the input, to use some
kind of normalization, etc.
In the third block necessary features are extracted. This step is an
important step as the correct features need to be extracted in the optimal way. A
vector of numbers or an image with particular properties is used to create a
template. A template is a synthesis of the relevant characteristics extracted from
the source. Elements of the biometric measurement that are not used in the
comparison algorithm are discarded in the template to reduce the file size and to
protect the identity of the enrollee during the enrollment phase, the template is
simply stored somewhere (on a card or within a database or both). During the
matching phase, the obtained template is passed to a matcher that compares it with
other existing templates, estimating the distance between them using any
algorithm (e.g. Hamming distance).
The matching program will analyze the template with the input. This will
then be output for any specified use or purpose (e.g. entrance in a restricted area)
Selection of biometrics in any practical application depending upon the
characteristic measurements and user requirements. We should consider
Performance, Acceptability, Circumvention, Robustness, Population coverage,
Size, Identity theft deterrence in selecting a particular biometric. Selection of
biometric based on user requirement considers Sensor availability, Device
availability, Computational time and reliability, Cost, Sensor area and power
consumption.

TECHNIQUE
3.2 FINGERPRINT RECOGNITION:
Fingerprint recognition or fingerprint authentication refers to the

automated method of verifying a match between two human fingerprints.
Generally most of biometrics which are manufactured at the early years based on
finger recognization. Fingerprints are one of many forms of biometrics used to
identify individuals and verify their identity. This article touches on two major
classes of algorithms (minutia and pattern) and four sensor designs (optical,
ultrasonic, passive capacitance, and active capacitance).
The analysis of fingerprints for matching purposes generally requires the

comparison of several features of the print pattern. These include patterns, which
are aggregate characteristics of ridges, and minutia points, which are unique
features found within the patterns. But nowadays there are many ways to create a
dummy fingerprints without permission of original one. So, in order to overcome
all these cheating techniques we are using this liveness security system in
biometrics. It is also necessary to know the structure and properties of human skin
in order to successfully employ some of the imaging technologies.
3.2.1 Different patterns:
The three basic patterns of fingerprint ridges are the arch, loop, and whorl:
Arch: The ridges enter from one side of the finger, rise in the center
forming an arc, and then exit the other side of the finger.

Loop: The ridges enter from one side of a finger, form a curve, and then
exit on that same side.

Whorl: Ridges form circularly around a central point on the finger.
Scientists have found that family members often share the same general
fingerprint patterns, leading to the belief that these patterns are inherited. The
basic structure of three different fingerprint patters are showed below

TECHNIQUE
3.2.2 Minutia features:
In the fingerprint recognization the second class of algorithm is minutia

algorithm. As a global feature, orientation field describes one of the basic
structures of a fingerprint. When the fingerprint is complemented with the
minutiae, we can get more information. Thus, a better performance can be
obtained by fusing the results of orientation field matching with conventional
minutiae-based matching. Some studies showed that incorporating local (minutiae)
and global (orientation field) feature can largely improve the performance.
However, as stated above, in many practical fingerprint recognition
systems, the original images and orientation field images are not saved, and we
cannot compute the orientation field directly.
In some other systems, additional orientation features cannot be saved into
the existing database easily, and we have to compute the orientation field by only
using the information of minutiae template. An interpolation algorithm is proposed
to estimate the orientation field from minutiae template (they used it to predict the
class of the fingerprint but not for fingerprint matching), in which the orientation
of a given point was computed from its neighboring minutiae. To consider the
global information, we will use the orientation model to reconstruct the orientation
field from minutiae.
Firstly we interpolate a few virtual minutiae in the sparse areas, and then

TECHNIQUE
apply the model-based method on these mixed minutiae (including the real and
virtual minutiae).
After that, the reconstructed orientation field is used into the matching stage by
combining with conventional minutiae-based matching. In this way we have to
create an oriented field fingerprint using minutia extraction techniques.
There are many different minutia extraction fields for different fingerprint
ridges; here we use mainly three different types of minutia extraction techniques.
Our present proposal is liveness detection method which uses this technique
whether person who uses the system is original or not. Generally a person can
cheat others but a machine not do that but nowadays the cheaters can try to cheat
system also by preparing the dummy fingerprints. To protect the world from these
unwanted users we are using the fingerprint recognization with minutia extraction
fields.
When the fingerprint is complemented with the minutiae, we can get more
information and better performance can be obtained by fusing the results in
biometric systems. The three main minutia extraction fields used in fingerprint
ridges are given below;
The major minatue features of fingerprint ridges are: Ridge ending and
bifurcation &short ridge.
The ridge ending is the point at which a ridge terminates. Bifurcations are points at
which a single ridge splits into two ridges. Short ridges (or dots) are ridges which
are significantly shorter than the average ridge length on the fingerprint.
Minutiae and patterns are very important in the analysis of fingerprints since
no two fingers have been shown to be identical.
Fingerprint matching is the process used to determine whether two sets of

TECHNIQUE
fingerprint ridge detail come from the same finger. There exist multiple algorithms
that do fingerprint matching in many different ways. Some methods involve
matching minutiae points between the two images, while others look for
similarities in the bigger structure of the fingerprint. In this project we propose a
method for fingerprint matching based on minutiae matching.
However, unlike conventional minutiae matching algorithms our algorithm also
takes into account region and line structures that exist between minutiae pairs.
This allows for more structural information of the fingerprint to be accounted for
thus resulting in stronger certainty of matching minutiae. Also, since most of the
region analysis is pre-processed it does not make the algorithm slower. The
Evidence from the testing of the pre-processed images gives stronger assurance
that using such data could lead to faster and stronger matches.
3.3 IRIS:
The processing capabilities of the IRIS vision systems specifically using
the IRIS v. The first stage of the architecture embeds sensors, parallel processing
analog and mixed-signal circuitry, control circuitry and memory. This front-stage
is implemented through dedicated bio-inspired chips. The second stage of the IRIS
vision system architecture is a digital microprocessor. The combination of parallel
preprocessing and serial post-processing makes the IRIS systems very efficient
particularly the IRIS systems are capable to close the sensor-processing-actuation
loop at a high speed. In this demo, the IRIS v is used to recognize data matrix
codes at more than 200 codes/sec rate.
3.3.1 Iris image enhancement:
Iris Image enhancement is used to improve the image clarity for the easy of
further operations. Since the iris images acquired from sensors or other media are
not assured with perfect quality, enhancement methods, for increasing the contrast
between ridges and furrows and for connecting the false broken points of ridges
due to insufficient amount of ink, are very useful to keep a higher accuracy to iris
recognition. Two methods are used for the iris image enhancement, the first one is
Histogram Equalization; the second one is Fourier Transform.
Histogram equalization: Histogram equalization is nothing but to separate the

dynamic range and also provide the equal pixels in all the gray levels.
Fourier Transform: Fourier (FT) transform is nothing but a mathematical prism. In

TECHNIQUE
FT the original signal is represented in the form of infinite frequencies of varying

amplitude. All the Images are periodic signals so FT are used to enhance the
images.
3.3.2 Iris Image Binarization:
A locally adaptive binarization method is performed to binarize the iris
image. Such a named method comes from the mechanism of transforming a pixel
value to 1 if the value is larger than the mean intensity value of the current block
(16x16) to which the pixel belongs.
3.3.3 Iris Image Segmentation:
In general, only a Region of Interest (ROI) is useful to be recognized for each iris
image. The image area without effective ridges and furrows is first discarded since
it only holds background information. Then the bound of the remaining effective
area is sketched out since the minutia in the bounded region is confusing with
those spurious minutias that are generated when the ridges are out of the sensor.
To extract the ROI, a two-step method is used. The first step is block direction
estimation and direction variety check, while the second is intrigued from some
Morphological methods. Two Morphological operations called OPEN and CLOSE
are adopted. The OPEN operation can expand images and remove peaks
introduced by background noise. The CLOSE operation can shrink images and
eliminate small cavities.
Fig 3.4 Iris Real and Fake Images
3.4 MINUTIA EXTRACTION:

Minutiae Extraction steps are explained below
3.4.1 Iris Ridge Thinning:
Thinning is the process of reducing the thickness of each line of patterns to

TECHNIQUE
just a single pixel width [5, 7]. The requirements of a good thinning algorithm
with respect to an iris are
The thinned iris image obtained should be of single pixel width with no
discontinuities.

Each ridge should be thinned to its centre pixel.

Noise and singular pixels should be eliminated.

No further removal of pixels should be possible after completion of
thinning process.
Use an iterative, parallel thinning algorithm, in each scan of the full iris
image, the algorithm marks down redundant pixels in each small image window
(3x3). And finally removes all those marked pixels after several scans. But it is
tested that such an iterative, parallel thinning algorithm has bad efficiency
although it can get an ideal thinned ridge map after enough scans. Uses a one-in-
all method to extract thinned ridges from gray-level iris images directly. Their
method traces along the ridges having maximum gray intensity value. However,
binarization is implicitly enforced since only pixels with maximum gray intensity
value are remained.
The advancement of each trace step still has large computation complexity
although it does not require the movement of pixel by pixel as in other thinning
algorithms. Thus the third method is bid out which uses the built-in Morphological
thinning function in MATLAB to do the thinning and after that an enhanced
thinning algorithm is applied to obtain an accurately thinned image.
3.4.2 Enhanced Thinning:
Ridge Thinning is to eliminate the redundant pixels of ridges till the ridges
are just one pixel wide. Ideally, the width of the skeleton should be strictly one
pixel. However, this is not always true. There are still some locations, where the
skeleton has a two-pixel width at some erroneous pixel locations. An erroneous
pixel is defined as the one with more than two 4-connected neighbours. These
erroneous pixels exist in the fork regions where bifurcations should be detected,
but they have CN = 2 instead of CN>2. The existence of erroneous pixels may
destroy the integrity of spurious bridges and spurs,

exchange the type of minutiae points, and

miss detect true bifurcations,

TECHNIQUE
Therefore, before minutiae extraction, there is a need to develop a validation

algorithm to eliminate the erroneous pixels while preserving the skeleton
connectivity at the fork regions. For this purpose an enhanced thinning algorithm
is bid out.
3.4.3 Enhanced thinning algorithm:
Step 1: Scanning the skeleton of iris image row by row from top-left to bottom-
right. Check if the pixel is 1.
Step 2: Count its four connected neighbours.
Step 3: If the sum is 2+,then is erroneous pixel
Step 4: Remove the erroneous pixel.
Step 5: Repeat steps 1 4 until whole of the image is scanned and the erroneous
pixels are removed.
3.5 FACE RECOGNITION:
Multibiometrics refers to the use of a combination of two or more sensor

modalities in a single identification system. The reason for combining different
sensor modalities is to improve the recognition accuracy. A multisensory
biometric system involving visual and thermal face images is present in this
project. Face recognition is one of the most important applications of image
analysis, its prime applications being recognition of individuals for the purpose of
security. It is one of the most no obtrusive biometric techniques.
However, the conclusion was that, though the recognition performance of
Even though faces recognition technology has moved from linear subspace
methods. Eigen and Fisher faces, to nonlinear methods such as kernel principle
component analysis (KPCA) and kernel Fischer discriminate analysis (KFDA),
many of the problems are yet to be addressed. Also, the nature of research studies
had been more on visible imagery with less attention on its thermal counterpart.
Previous studies have shown that infrared imagery offers a promising alternative
to visible imagery for handling variations in face appearance due to illumination
changes.
It is observed that face recognition on thermal images degrades more
sharply than with visible images when probe and gallery images are chosen from
different sessions. Results in indicated better performance for visible imagery
indoors under controlled lighting conditions, but thermal imagery-based face

TECHNIQUE
recognition was better than its visible counterpart outdoors. Also, the recognition
results of thermal imagery for both indoors and outdoors was found to be similar,
thus proving that illumination had very little effect on thermal imagery.
Thermal imagery degraded the fusion of both visible and thermal

modalities yielded better overall performance. Feature-based face recognition
techniques have demonstrated the capability of invariance to facial variations
caused by illumination and have achieved high accuracy rates. To make the
recognition process illumination invariant, phase congruency feature maps are
used instead of intensity values as the input to the face recognition system.
The feature selection process presented in this PROJECT is derived from
the concept of modular spaces. Recognition techniques based on local regions
have achieved high accuracy rates. Though the face images are affected due to
variations such as non uniform illumination, expressions and partial occlusions,
facial variations are confined mostly to local regions. Modularizing the images
would help to localize these variations, provided the modules created are
sufficiently small. But in this process, a large amount of dependencies among
various neighboring pixels might be ignored. This can be countered by making the
modules larger, but this would result in an improper localization of the facial
variations.
In order to deal with this problem, a module creation strategy has been
implemented in this PROJECT which considers additional pixel dependencies
across various sub-regions. This helps in providing additional information that
could help in improving the classification accuracy. Also, linear subspace
approaches such as PCA will not be able to capture the relationship among more
than two variables. They cannot depict the variations caused by illuminations,
expressions, etc., properly.
In order to capture the relationships among more than two pixels, the data
is projected into nonlinear higher dimensional spaces using the kernel method.
This enables to capture the nonlinear relationships among the pixels within the
modules. Face recognition accuracy in thermal images has been lower compared
to visible images under controlled environments. The major problems in thermal
face recognition are
(i) Variations in local regions due to temperature inequalities and

TECHNIQUE
(ii) Opaqueness of glass and, hence, partially occluded faces.

Thermal imaging is sensitive to temperature changes in the surrounding
environment. Also it is sensitive to variations in the heat patterns of the face.
Factors that could contribute to these variations include facial expressions,
physical conditions such as lack of sleep, and psychological conditions such as
fear, stress, excitement, etc. Although the problems faced by thermal facial
recognition are different from the visual counterpart, they are similar in the sense
that many of the variations are confined to local regions. The proposed feature
selection process overcomes all the above mentioned challenges due to its
robustness to variations caused due to facial expressions, illumination, contrast
and partial occlusions.

TECHNIQUE
CHAPTER 4
IMPLEMENTATION OF PROJECT

TECHNIQUE
CHAPTER 4
IMPLEMENTATION OF PROJECT
4.1 LIVENESS ASSESSMENT IN AUTHENTICATION SYSTEM:
Liveness assessment methods represent a challenging engineering problem as

they have to satisfy certain demanding requirements:
(i) Non-invasive, the technique should in no case be harmful for the individual or
require an excessive contact with the user;
(ii) User friendly, people should not be reluctant to use it;
(iii) Fast results have to be produced in a much reduced interval as the user cannot
be asked to interact with the sensor for a long period of time;
(iv) Low cost, a wide use cannot be expected if the cost is excessively high;
(v) Performance, in addition to having a good fake detection rate, the protection
scheme should not degrade the recognition performance (i.e., false rejection) of the
biometric system.
4.2 SOFTWARE-BASED TECHNIQUES:
In this case the fake trait is detected once the sample has been acquired with a
standard sensor (i.e., features used to distinguish between real and fake traits are
extracted from the biometric sample, and not from the trait itself).
In the present work we propose a novel software-based multi-biometric and

TECHNIQUE
multi-attack protection method which is used to overcome these limitations by using

image quality assessment (IQA). It is not only capable of operating with a very good
performance under different biometric systems (multi-biometric) and for diverse
spoofing scenarios, but it also provides a very good level of protection against certain
non-spoofing attacks (multi-attack).
Moreover, the software based techniques for this type of systems provides
more advantages and fast and accurate responses, as it only needs one image (i.e., the
same sample acquired for biometric recognition) to detect whether it is real or fake.
And this technique is user-friendly (transparent to the user) and doesnt allow the
fake users; cheap and easy to embed in already functional systems (as no new piece
of hardware is required).
An added advantage of the proposed technique is its speed and very low
complexity, which makes it very well suited to operate on real scenarios (one of the
desired characteristics of this type of methods). As it does not deploy any trait-
specific property (e.g., minutiae points, iris position or face detection), the
computation load needed for image processing purposes is very reduced, using only
general image quality measures fast to compute, combined with very simple
classifiers. It has been tested on publicly available attack databases of iris, fingerprint
and 2D face, where it has reached results fully comparable to those obtained on the
same databases and following the same experimental protocols by more complex
trait-specific top-ranked approaches from the state-of-the-art.
4.3 IMAGE QUALITY ASSESSMENT FOR LIVENESS DETECTION:
The use of image quality assessment for Liveness detection is motivated by

the assumption that: It is expected that a fake image captured in an attack attempt
will have different quality than a real sample acquired in the normal operation
scenario for which the sensor was designed. Expected quality differences between
real and fake samples may include: degree of sharpness, color and luminance levels,
local artifacts, amount of information found in both type of images (entropy),
structural distortions or natural appearance.
For example, iris images captured from a printed PROJECT are more likely
to be blurred or out of focus due to trembling; face images captured from a mobile
device will probably be over-or under-exposed; and it is not rare that fingerprint
images captured from a gummy finger present local acquisition artifacts such as
spots and patches. Furthermore, in an eventual attack in which a synthetically

TECHNIQUE
produced image is directly injected to the communication channel before the feature
extractor, this fake sample will most likely lack some of the properties found in
natural images. Following this quality-difference hypothesis, in the present
research work we explore the potential of general image quality assessment as a
protection method against different biometric attacks (with special attention to
spoofing). As the implemented features do not evaluate any specific property of a
given biometric modality or of a specific attack, they may be computed on any
image. This gives the proposed method a new multi-biometric dimension which is
not found in previously described protection schemes. In the current state-of-the-art,
the rationale behind the use of IQA features for liveness detection is supported by
three factors:
Image quality has been successfully used in previous works for image
manipulation detection and stag analysis in the forensic field. To a certain extent,
many spoofing attacks, especially those which involve taking a picture of a facial
image displayed in a2D device (e.g., spoofing attacks with printed iris or face
images), may be regarded as a type of image manipulation which can be effectively
detected, as shown in the present research work, by the use of different quality
features.
In addition to the previous studies in the forensic area, different features
measuring trait-specific quality properties have already been used for Liveness
detection purposes in fingerprint and iris applications. However, even though these
two works give a solid basis to the use of image quality as a protection method in
biometric systems, none of them is general. For instance, measuring the ridge and
valley frequency may be a good parameter to detect certain fingerprint spoofs, but it
cannot be used in iris Liveness detection.
On the other hand, the amount of occlusion of the eye is valid as an iris anti-
spoofing mechanism, but will have little use in fake fingerprint detection. This same
reasoning can be applied to the vast majority of the Liveness detection methods
found in the state-of-the art. Although all of them represent very valuable works
which bring insight into the difficult problem of spoofing detection, they fail to
generalize to different problems as they are usually designed to work on one specific
modality and, in many cases, also to detect one specific type of spoofing attack.
Human observers very often refer to the different appearance of real and fake
samples to distinguish between them. As stated above, the different metrics and

TECHNIQUE
methods designed for IQA intend to estimate in an objective and reliable way the
perceived appearance of images by humans. Different quality measures present
different sensitivities to image artifacts and distortions. For instance, measures like
the mean squared error respond more to additive noise, whereas others such as the
spectral phase error are more sensitive to blur; while gradient-related features react to
distortions concentrated around edges and textures.
Therefore, using a wide range of IQMs exploiting complementary image quality
properties should permit to detect the aforementioned quality differences between
real and fake samples expected to be found in many attack attempts (i.e., providing
the method with multi- attack protection capabilities). All these observations lead us
to believe that there is sound proof for the quality-difference hypothesis and that
image quality measures have the potential to achieve success in biometric protection
tasks.
4.4 FULL-REFERENCE IQ MEASURES:
Full-reference (FR) IQA methods rely on the availability of a clean

undistorted reference image to estimate the quality of the test sample. In the
problem of fake detection addressed in this work such a reference image is
unknown, as the detection system only has access to the input sample. In order
to circumvent this limitation, the same strategy already successfully used for

TECHNIQUE
image manipulation detection and for stage analysis, is implemented here. The
input grey-scale image I (of size N M) is filtered with a low-pass Gaussian
kernel ( = 0.5 and size 3 3) in order to generate a smoothed version I .Then,
the quality between both images (I and I) is computed according to the
corresponding full-reference IQA metric. This approach assumes that the loss of
quality produced by Gaussian filtering differs between real and fake biometric
samples.
Gaussian filter:
In electronics and signal processing, a Gaussian filter is a filter whose impulse
response is a Gaussian function (or an approximation to it). Gaussian filters have the
properties of having no overshoot to a step function input while minimizing the rise
and fall time. This behavior is closely connected to the fact that the Gaussian filter
has the minimum possible group delay. It is considered the ideal time domain filter,
just as the since is the ideal frequency domain filter. These properties are important
in areas such as oscilloscope and digital telecommunication systems.
Mathematically, a Gaussian filter modifies the input signal by convolution with a
Gaussian function; this transformation is also known as the Weierstrass transform.
The Gaussian function is non-zero for x \in (-\infty,\infty) and would theoretically
require an infinite window length. However, since it decays rapidly, it is often
reasonable to truncate the filter window and implement the filter directly for narrow
windows, in effect by using a simple rectangular window function. In other cases, the
truncation may introduce significant errors. Better results can be achieved by instead
using a different window function; see scale space implementation for details.
Filtering involves convolution, the filter function is said to be the kernel of an

integral transform. The Gaussian kernel is continuous. Most commonly, the discrete
equivalent is the sampled Gaussian kernel that is produced by sampling points from
the continuous Gaussian. An alternate method is to use the discrete Gaussian kernel
which has superior characteristics for some purposes. Unlike the sampled Gaussian
kernel, the discrete Gaussian kernel is the solution to the discrete diffusion equation.
Since the Fourier transform of the Gaussian function yields a Gaussian function, the
signal (preferably after being divided into overlapping windowed blocks) can be
transformed with a Fast Fourier transform, multiplied with a Gaussian function and
transformed back. This is the standard procedure of applying an arbitrary finite

TECHNIQUE
impulse response filter, with the only difference that the Fourier transform of the
filter window is explicitly known. Due to the central limit theorem, the Gaussian can
be approximated by several runs of a very simple filter such as the moving average.
The simple moving average corresponds to convolution with the constant B-spline (
a rectangular pulse ), and, for example, four iterations of a moving average yields a
cubic B-spline as filter window which approximates the Gaussian quite well.
4.4.1 Different types FR-IQ Measurements:
Error Sensitivity Measures: Traditional perceptual image quality assessment
approaches are based on measuring the errors (i.e., signal differences) between the
distorted and the reference images, and attempt to quantify these errors in a way that
simulates human visual error sensitivity features. Although their efficiency as signal
fidelity measures is somewhat controversial, up to date, these are probably the most
widely used methods for IQA as they conveniently make use of many known
psychophysical features of the human visual system, they are easy to calculate and
usually have very low computational complexity. Several of these metrics have been
included in the 25-feature parameterization proposed in the present work. For clarity,
these features have been classified here into five different methods those are listed
below:
Pixel Difference measures: These features compute the distortion between

two images on the basis of their pixel wise differences. Here we include:
Mean Squared Error (MSE), Peak Signal to Noise Ratio (PSNR), Signal to
Noise Ratio (SNR), Structural Content (SC), Maximum Difference (MD),
Average Difference (AD), Normalized Absolute Error (NAE), R-Averaged
Maximum Difference (RAMD) and Laplacian Mean Squared Error (LMSE).
The formal definitions for each of these features are given in Table I. In the
RAMD entry in Table I, maxr is defined as the r -highest pixel difference
between two images. For the present implementation, R = 10. In the LMSE
entry in Table I, h(Ii, j ) = Ii+1, j +Ii1, j + Ii, j+1 + Ii, j1 4Ii, j .
Correlation-based measures: The similarity between two digital images can

also be quantified in terms of the correlation function. A variant of correlation
based measures can be obtained by considering the statistics of the angles
between the pixel vectors of the original and distorted images. These features
include (also defined in Table I): Normalized Cross-Correlation (NXC),
Mean Angle Similarity (MAS) and Mean Angle-Magnitude Similarity
TECHNIQUE
(MAMS).
Edge-based measures: Edges and other two-dimensional features such as

corners, are some of the most informative parts of an image, which play a key
role in the human visual system and in many computer vision algorithms
including quality assessment application . Since the structural distortion of an
image is tightly linked with its edge degradation, here we have considered
two edge-related quality measures: Total Edge Difference (TED) and Total
Corner Difference (TCD). In order to implement both features, which are
computed according to the corresponding expressions given in Table I, we
use: (i) the Sobel operator to build the binary edge maps IE and IE ; ( ii) the
Harris corner detector to compute the number of corners Ncr and Ncr found
in I and I.
Spectral distance measures: The Fourier transform is another traditional

image processing tool which has been applied to the field of image quality
assessment. In this work we will consider as IQ spectral-related features: the
Spectral Magnitude Error (SME) and the Spectral Phase Error (SPE), defined
in Table I (where F and F are the respective Fourier transforms of I and I),
and arg (F) denotes phase.
Gradient-based measures: Gradients convey important visual information
which can be of great use for quality assessment. Many of the distortions that
can affect an image are reflected by a change in its gradient. Therefore, using
such information, structural and contrast changes can be effectively captured.
Two simple gradient-based features are included in the biometric protection
system proposed in the present article: Gradient Magnitude Error (GME) and
Gradient Phase Error (GPE), defined in Table I (where G and G are the
gradient maps of I and I defined as G = Gx+iGy, where Gx and Gy are the
gradients in the x and y directions).
Structural Similarity Measures:
Although being very convenient and widely used, the aforementioned image
quality metrics based on error sensitivity present several problems which are
evidenced by their mismatch (in many cases) with subjective human-based quality
scoring system. In this scenario, a recent new paradigm for image quality assessment
based on structural similarity was proposed following the hypothesis that the human
visual system is highly adapted for extracting structural information from the

TECHNIQUE
viewing field. Therefore, distortions in an image that come from variations in

lighting, such as contrast or brightness changes (nonstructural distortions), should be
treated differently from structural ones. Among these recent objective perceptual
measures, the Structural Similarity Index Measure (SSIM), has the simplest
formulation and has gained widespread popularity in a broad range of practical
applications. In view of its very attractive properties, the SSIM has been included in
the feature parameterization.
Information Theoretic Measures:
The quality assessment problem may also be understood, from an
information theory perspective, as an information-fidelity problem (rather than a
signal-fidelity problem). The core idea behind these approaches is that an image
source communicates to a receiver through a channel that limits the amount of
information that could flow through it, thereby introducing distortions. The goal is to
relate the visual quality of the test image to the amount of information shared
between the test and the reference signals, or more precisely, the mutual information
between them. Under this general framework, image quality measures based on
information fidelity exploit the (in some cases imprecise) relationship between
statistical image information and visual quality. In the present work we consider two
of these information theoretic features: the Visual Information Fidelity (VIF) and the
Reduced Reference Entropic Difference index (RRED). Both metrics are based on
the information theoretic perspective of IQA but each of them takes either a global or
a local approximation to the problem, as is explained below.
The VIF metric measures the quality fidelity as the ratio between the total
information (measured in terms of entropy) ideally extracted by the brain from the
whole distorted image and the total information conveyed within the complete
reference image. This metric relies on the assumption that natural images of perfect
quality, in the absence of any distortions, pass through the human visual system
(HVS) of an observer before entering the brain, which extracts cognitive information
from it. For distorted images, it is hypothesized that the reference signal has passed
through another distortion channel before entering the HVS.
The VIF measure is derived from the ratio of two mutual information
quantities: the mutual information between the input and the output of the HVS
channel when no distortion channel is present (i.e., reference image information) and
the mutual information between the input of the distortion channel and the output of

TECHNIQUE
the HVS channel for the test image. Therefore, to compute the VIF metric, the entire
reference image is required as quality is assessed on a global basis. On the other
hand, the RRED metric approaches the problem of QA from the perspective of
measuring the amount of local information difference between the reference image
and the projection of the distorted image onto the space of natural images, for a given
sub-band of the wavelet domain.
In essence, the RRED algorithm computes the average difference between

scaled local entropies of wavelet coefficients of reference and projected distorted
images in a distributed fashion. This way, contrary to the VIF feature, for the RRED
it is not necessary to have access the entire reference image but only to a reduced
part of its information (i.e., quality is computed locally). This required information
can even be reduced to only one single scalar in case all the scaled entropy terms in
the selected wavelet sub-band are considered in one single block.
4.5 NO-REFERENCE IQ MEASURES:
Unlike the objective reference IQA methods, in general the human visual
system does not require of a reference sample to determine the quality level of an
image. Following this same principle, automatic no-reference image quality
assessment (NR-IQA) algorithms try to handle the very complex and challenging
problem of assessing the visual quality of images, in the absence of a reference.
Presently, NR-IQA methods generally estimate the quality of the test image
according to some pre-trained statistical models. Depending on the images used to
train this model and on the a priori knowledge required, the methods are coarsely
divided into one of three trends:
Distortion-specific approaches: These techniques rely on previously acquired

knowledge about the type of visual quality loss caused by a specific distortion. The
final quality measure is computed according to a model trained on clean images and
on images affected by this particular distortion.
Two of these measures have been included in the biometric protection
method proposed in the present work. The JPEG Quality Index (JQI), which
evaluates the quality in images affected by the usual block artifacts found in many
compression algorithms running at low bit rates such as the JPEG. The High-Low
Frequency Index (HLFI), which is formally, defined in Table.
It was inspired by previous work which considered local gradients as a blind
metric to detect blur and noise. Similarly, the HLFI feature is sensitive to the

TECHNIQUE
sharpness of the image by computing the difference between the power in the lower
and upper frequencies of the Fourier Spectrum. In the HLFI entry in Table I, il , ih, jl
, jh are respectively the indices corresponding to the lower and upper frequency
thresholds considered by the method. In the current implementation, il = ih = 0.15N
and jl = jh = 0.15M.
Training-based approaches: Similarly to the previous class of NR-IQA methods,
in this type of techniques a model is trained using clean and distorted images. Then,
the quality score is computed based on a number of features extracted from the test
image and related to the general model. However, unlike the former approaches,
these metrics intend to provide a general quality score not related to a specific
distortion. To this end, the statistical model is trained with images affected by
different types of distortions. This is the case of the Blind Image Quality Index
(BIQI) described in, which is part of the 25 feature set used in the present work. The
BIQI follows a two-stage framework in which the individual measures of different
distortion-specific experts are combined to generate one global quality score.
Natural Scene Statistic approaches: These blind IQA techniques use a priori
knowledge taken from natural scene distortion-free images to train the initial model
(i.e. no distorted images are used). The rationale behind this trend relies on the
hypothesis that undistorted images of the natural world present certain regular
properties which fall within a certain subspace of all possible images.
If quantified appropriately, deviations from the regularity of natural statistics
can help to evaluate the perceptual quality of an image. This approach is followed by
the Natural Image Quality Evaluator (NIQE) used in the present work. The NIQE is a
completely blind image quality analyzer based on the construction of a quality aware
collection of statistical features (derived from a corpus of natural undistorted
images).
Measured Parameters From An Image:
Image quality assessments measures can be done in two different ways fully
reference method and no reference method. Here we are calculating 25 different
image quality measurements those are mentioned in the below table

TECHNIQUE
Table 4.1: Different parameters measured for an image

MSE Mean Square Error
PSNR Peak Signal to Noise Ratio
SNR Signal to Noise Ratio
SC Structural Content
MD Maximum Difference
AD Average Difference
NAE Normalized Absolute Error
RAMD R-Average MD
LMSE Laplacian MSE
NXC Normalized Cross-Correlation
MAS Mean Angle Similarity
MAMS Mean Angle Magnitude Similarity
TED Total Edge Difference
TCD Total Corner Difference
SME Spectral Magnitude Error
SPE Spectral Phase Error
GME Gradient Magnitude Error
GPE Gradient Phase Error
SSIM Structural Similarity Index
VIF Visual Information Fidelity
RRED Reduced Ref. Entropic Difference
JQI Jpeg Quality Index
HLFI High-Low Frequency Index
BIQI Blind Image Quality Index
NIQE Naturalness Image Quality Estimation

TECHNIQUE
4.6 DUAL TREE COMPLEX WAVELETS TRANSFORM:
The complex wavelet transform (CWT) is a complex-valued extension

to thestandard discrete wavelet transform (DWT).It is a two-dimensional
wavelet transform which provides multi resolution , sparse representation, and
useful characterization of the structure of an image. Further, it purveys a high degree
of shift-invariance in its magnitude, which was investigated in However, a drawback
to this transform is that it is exhibits (where is the dimension of the signal
being transformed) redundancy compared to a separable (DWT). The use of complex
wavelets in image processing was originally set up in 1995 by J.M. Lina and L.
Gagnon in the framework of the Daubechies orthogonal filters banks. It was then
generalized in 1997 by Prof. Nick Kingsbury.
In the area of computer vision, by exploiting the concept of visual contexts,
one can quickly focus on candidate regions, where objects of interest may be found,
and then compute additional features through the CWT for those regions only. These
additional features, while not necessary for global regions, are useful in accurate
detection and recognition of smaller objects. Similarly, the CWT may be applied to
detect the activated voxels of cortex and additionally the temporal independent
component analysis (TICA) may be utilized to extract the underlying independent
sources whose number is determined by Bayesian information criterion.
The Dual-tree complex wavelet transform (DTCWT) calculates the complex

transform of a signal using two separate DWT decompositions (tree a and tree b). If
the filters used in one are specifically designed different from those in the other it is
possible for one DWT to produce the real coefficients and the other the imaginary.
Fig: 4.3 Block diagram for a 3-level DTCWT

TECHNIQUE
This redundancy of two provides extra information for analysis but at the
expense of extra computational power. It also provides approximate shift-invariance
(unlike the DWT) yet still allows perfect reconstruction of the signal.
The design of the filters is particularly important for the transform to occur correctly
and the necessary characteristics are:
The low-pass filters in the two trees must differ by half a sample period.
Reconstruction filters are the reverse of analysis.
All filters from the same ortho normal set.
Tree a filters are the reverse of tree b filters.
Both trees have the same frequency response.
The Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT) has been a founding stone for all
applications of digital image processing: from image denoising to pattern
recognition, passing through image encoding and more. While being a complete and
(quasi)invertible transform of 2D data, the Discrete Wavelet Transform gives rise to
a phenomenon known as checker board pattern, which means that data orientation
analysis is impossible. Furthermore, the DWT is not shift-invariant, making it less
useful for methods based on the computation of invariant features. In an attempt to
solve these two problems affecting the DWT, Freeman and Adelson first introduced
the concept of Steerable filters, which can be used to decompose an image into a
Steerable Pyramid, by means of the Steerable Pyramid Transform (SPT).
Thus, a further development of the SPT, involving the use of a Hilbert pair of
filters to compute the energy response, has been accomplished with the Complex
Wavelet Transform (CWT). Similarly to the SPT, in order to retain the whole Fourier
spectrum, the transform needs to be over-complete by a factor of 4, i.e. there are 3
complex coefficients for each real one. While the CWT is also efficient, since it can
be computed through separable filters, it still lacks the Perfect Reconstruction
property. Therefore, Kingsbury also introduced the Dual-tree Complex Wavelet
Transform (DTCWT), which has the added characteristic of Perfect Reconstruction
at the cost of approximate shift-invariance.
The present work has made several contributions to the state-of-the-art in the
field of biometric security, in particular:
i ) it has shown the high potential of image quality assessment for securing biometric

TECHNIQUE
systems against a variety of attacks;

ii) Proposal and validation of a new biometric protection method;
iii) Reproducible evaluation on multiple biometric traits based on publicly
available databases;
iv) Comparative results with other previously proposed protection solutions.

TECHNIQUE
CHAPTER 5
SOFTWARE ASPECTS

TECHNIQUE
CHAPTER 5
SOFTWARE ASPECTS
5.1 INTRODUCTION TO MATLAB
In this section we present the basics of working with images in Matlab. We
will see how to read, display, write and convert images. We will also talk about the
way images are represented in Matlab and how to convert between the different
types.
The Matlab command for reading an image is
imread('filename')
Note that we suppress the output with a semicolon, otherwise we will get in the
output all the numbers that make the image. 'filename' is the name of a file in the
current directory or the name of a file including the full path. Try
>> f = imread('chest-xray.tif');
We now have an array f where the image is stored
>> whos f
NameSize Bytes Class
f 494x600 296400 uint8 array
Grand total is 296400 elements using 296400 bytes
f is an array of class uint8, and size 494x600. That means 494 rows and 600
columns. We can see some of this information with the following commands
>> size(f)
ans = 494 600
>> class(f)
ans = uint8
We will talk later on about the different image classes.
Sometimes it is useful to determine the number of rows and columns in an image.
We can achieve this by means of
>> [M, N] = size(f);
To display the image we use imshow
>> imshow(f)
You will get a window similar to this

TECHNIQUE
Fig5.1: Example image (f)
Note that in the figure toolbar we have buttons that allow us to zoom parts of the
image. The syntax imshow(f, [low high])displays all pixels with values less than or
equal to low as black, all pixels with values greater or equal to high as white. Try
in the image.
Once the image has been labeled, use the regionprops command to obtain
quantitative information about the objects:
D = regionprops(L, properties)
Theres a lot of useful statistical information about objects that can be extracted
using regionprops. Heres a list: >> imshow(f,[10 50])
Finally,
>> imshow(f,[])
sets the variable low to the minimum value of array f and high to its maximum value.
This is very useful for displaying images that have a low dynamic range. This occurs
very frequently with 16-bit images from a microscope.
We can also display portions of an image by specifying the range
>> imshow(f(200:260,150:220))
Another matlab tool available to display images and do simple image manipulations
is imtool. Try
>> imtool(f)
In the figure window we have now available the following tools: overview, pixel
region, image information, adjust contrast and zoom. Try them.

TECHNIQUE
Images can be written to disk using the function imwrite. Its format is
imwrite(f, 'filename')
with this syntax, filename must include the file format extension. Alternatively
imwrite(f, 'filename', format)

saves f using format. For example
>> imwrite(f, 'test', 'jpeg', 'quality', 25)
In the help you can find more information about available formats and their options.
Image types, data classes and image classes
There are different image types and image classes available in MATLAB. The two
primary image types you will be working with are as follows
Intensity images
o uint16 [0, 65535] (CCD cameras on microscopes)
o uint8[0, 255] (From your standard digital camera)
308 308
o double [-10 , 10 ]
Binary images (black and white)
o logical, 0 or 1
Raw images typically come in the form of an unsigned integer (uint16 denotes 16-bit
unsigned integer, and uint8 denotes 8-bit unsigned integer). However floating-point
operations (mathematical operations that involve a decimal point, such as log(a)) can
only be done with arrays of class double.
Hence, to work on a raw image, first convert it from uint16 or uint8 to double using
the double function:
>> f = imread('actin.tif');
>> g = double(f);
Now type
>> whos;
to see the different data types associated with each variable. Note that while the data
type changes, the actual numbers after the conversion remain the same.
Many MATLAB image processing operations operate under the assumption that the
image is scaled to the range [0,1]. For instance, when imshow displays an double
image, it displays an intensity of 0 as black and 1 as white. You can automatically
create a scaled double image using mat2gray:

TECHNIQUE
>> h = mat2gray(g);
Certain image processing commands only work with scaled double images.
Finally, we can convert an intensity image into a binary image using the
command im2bw(f, T), where T is a threshold in the range [0, 1]. Matlab converts f
to class double, and then sets to 0 the values below T and to 1 the values above T.
The result is of class logical. See the following example.
We wish to convert the following double image
>> f = [1 2; 3 4]
1 2
f=
3 4
to binary such that values 1 and 2 become 0 and the other two values become 1. First
we convert it to the range [0, 1]
>> g = mat2gray(f)
g= 0 0.3333
0.6667 1.0000
We can convert the previous image to a binary one using a threshold, say, of value
0.6:
>> gb = im2bw(g, 0.6)
gb = 0 0
1 1
Note that we can obtain the same result using relational operators
>> gb = f > 2
gb =0 0
1 1
Binary images generated by thresholding often form the basis for extracting
morphological features in microscopy images. In the next section, we will extract
some basic quantitative information about objects in an image by first using
thresholding to generate a binary image and then using the region props command
to extract quantitative information from the binary image.
Basic Segmentation using Thresholding
Many biological images comprise of light objects over a constant dark
background (especially those obtained using fluorescence microscopy), in such a
way that object and background pixels have gray levels grouped into two dominant
modes. One obvious way to

TECHNIQUE
extract the objects from the background is to select a threshold T that separates these
modes:
g(x,y) = 1 if f(x,y) > T
= 0 otherwise
where g(x,y) is the threshold binary image of f(x,y). We can implement the
thresholding operation in MATLAB by the following function:
g = im2bw(f,T)
The first argument f gives the input image, and the second argument T gives the
threshold value.
Image histograms
We need to choose a threshold value T that properly separates light objects from the
dark background. Image histograms provide a means to visualize the distribution of
grayscale intensity values in the entire image. They are useful for estimating
background values, determining thresholds, and for visualizing the effect of contrast
adjustments on the image (next section). The matlab function to visualize image
histograms is imhist
>> f = imread('chest-xray.tif');
>> imhist(f);
The histogram has 256 bins by default. The following command makes 20 bins
>> imhist(f,20);
A good value for T can be obtained by visually inspecting the image histogram
obtained using the imhist command:
>> im = imread('rice.png');

TECHNIQUE
Fig 5.2 Example picture (rice.png)

>> imhist(im);
Based on the histogram, pick a grayscale value manually that separates the light rice
grains from the dark background. Then threshold the image and display the results.
MATLAB provides a function graythresh that automatically computes a threshold
value:
T = graythresh(im)
where im is the input image and T is the resulting threshold. graythresh calculates
the threshold value by essentially maximizing the weighted distances between the
global mean of the image histogram and the means of the background and
foreground intensity pixels.
EXAMPLE
In this example, we threshold the image of rice grains opened above:
>>im=imread('rice.png');
>> im = mat2gray(im);
Calculate the threshold value:
>> level = graythresh(im);
and create a new binary image using the obtained threshold value:
>> imb = im2bw(im,level);
Note that the thresholding operation segments the rice grains quite well.
However, a problem in this image is that the rice grains near the bottom of the image
arent segmented well the background is uneven and is low at the bottom, leading
to incorrect segmentation. Well see a way to correct for this uneven background
using image processing later.Using the binary image, we can then calculate region
properties of objects in the image, such as area, diameter, etc An object in a binary
image is a set of white pixels (ones) that are connected to each other. We can
enumerate all the objects in the figure using the bwlabel command:
[L, num] = bwlabel(f)
where L gives the labeled image, and num gives the number of objects. To label the
binary image of the rice grains, type:

TECHNIQUE
>> [L, N] = bwlabel(imb);

Now look at the labeled image L using imtool.
Table 5.1 Imtool
'Area' 'Euler Number' 'Orientation'
'Bounding Box' 'Extent' 'Perimeter'
'Centroid' 'Extrema' 'Pixel Index List'
'Convex Area' 'Filled Area' 'Pixel List'
'Convex Hull' 'Filled Image' 'Solidity'
'Convex Image' 'Image' 'Sub array Idx'
'Eccentricity' 'Major Axis Length'
'Equiv Diameter' 'Minor Axis Length'
Extract the area and perimeter of individual objects in the labeled image as follows:
>> D = regionprops(L, 'area', 'perimeter');
The information in D is stored in an object called a structure array. A
structure array is a variable in MATLAB that contains multiple fields for storage of
information. You can access the field information in D as follows:
>> D
D =151x1 struct array with fields:
Area
Perimeter
Access an individual element in the structure array by referring to its index in
parenthesis:
>> D(1)
ans = Area: 145
Perimeter: 58.2843

TECHNIQUE
CHAPTER 6
RESULT ANALYSIS

TECHNIQUE
CHAPTER 6
RESULT ANALYSIS
6.1 TOP MODULE:
Finally, after simulation of the code, a window is opened which is shown in

figure 6.1. This window consists of 4 labels those are About, Process, Help and Exit.
About is used to identify the given biometrics data of fingerprints, iris and 2d faces
are fake or original by using IAQ parameters. Help is used to select the process
button; the input GUI will open then input is given. Exit is used to quit from the
window. Process label gives information about the selection of image (finger print,
iris, face) to weather it is fake or real.
Fig 6.1: Top module
After selecting the Process Label another Window is opened which is shown
in figure 6.2 this window is called Input window.

TECHNIQUE
6.2 INPUT PROCESS WINDOW:

In Input window, an image (fingerprint or face or iris) can be selected by
using a Load Image Label shown left side of the figure 6.2. After that, selected image
can be converted into Gray colour by selecting Gray Image label then Resize and
Filter the image by using the labels shown in input window then click the arrow
button for further process.
Fig 6.2: Input Process Window

TECHNIQUE
6.3 IDENTIFICATION PROCESS:

After the conversion process explained in second window process i.e., the
loaded image can be converted into Gray image, Filtered and Resized the third
window is opened shown in Figure 6.3. This gives information about the converted
image. Now by click the arrow button shown in this window further process will be
done.
Fig 6.3: Identification Process

TECHNIQUE
6.4 IQA PARAMETERS:

Using the above identification process the following IQ parameters are
measured shown in figure 6.4. Initially some threshold values are mentioned for
these parameters. After calculating these parameters and by using the threshold
values of these parameters it can recognize whether the loaded image is fake or real.
Fig 6.4: Measured IQ Parameters

TECHNIQUE
6.5 FINAL RESULT:
Based on the above calculating parameters for the loaded image it shows
that it is fake. Why because some of the parameters get negative values shown in
figure 6.4, so that the loaded image is fake shown in figure 6.5.
Fig 6.5: Final Result

TECHNIQUE
6.6 ADVANTAGES:
It provides high potential of image quality assessment for securing biometric

systems against a variety of attacks.
The error rates achieved by the proposed protection scheme are in many
cases lower than those reported by other trait-specific state-of-the-art anti-
spoofing systems.
It is simple, fast, non-intrusive and user-friendly because of its

Multibiometric and Multi attack characteristics
I t also provides the analysis of the features individual relevance.

6.7APPLICATIONS:
It is an applicable system in offices, colleges and other systems which require
more security from fake users.
It is also used in Forensic labs for the detection of finger prints of criminals.

TECHNIQUE
CHAPTER 7
CONCLUSION & FUTURE SCOPE

TECHNIQUE
CHAPTER 7
CONCLUSION & FUTURE SCOPE
7.1 CONCLUSION:
Finally, by using DTCWT, IQA techniques, this project is well executed on

different sets of images. This is very much efficient in finding of fake or original.
This interest has lead to big advances in the field of security-enhancing technologies
for biometric-based applications. However, in spite of this noticeable improvement,
the development of efficient protection methods against known threats has proven to
be a challenging task. Yet, some disparities between the real and fake images may
become evident once the images are translated into a proper feature space. These
differences come from the fact that biometric traits, as 3d-objects, have their own
optical qualities.
7.2 FUTURE SCOPE:
To improve the clarity of ridge and valley structures in fingerprint images, a

number of techniques have been used to enhance gray-level images and by using the
extension of the considered 25 features set with new image quality measures it can
be applicable to palm prints, hand geometry and vein. We can also use the
enhancement algorithm, which applies a bank of band pass Gabor filters on the
normalized fingerprint image using estimated orientation and frequency information.
So we will focus on the extraction of a valley mask, not a ridge mask as many
methods have used for fingerprint recognition. And it is also used for the systems
working with face videos by using enhanced algorithms and filter techniques.

TECHNIQUE
REFERENCES

TECHNIQUE
REFERENCES
[1] S. Prabhakar, S. Pankanti, and A. K. Jain, Biometric recognition: Security and

privacy concerns, IEEE Security Privacy, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 3342, Mar./Apr. 2003.
[2] T. Matsumoto, Artificial irises: Importance of vulnerability analysis, in Proc.
AWB, 2004.
[3] J. Galbally, C. McCool, J. Fierrez, S. Marcel, and J. Ortega-Garcia, On the
vulnerability of face verification systems to hill-climbing attacks, Pattern
Recognit., vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 1027 1038, 2010
[4] A. K. Jain, K. Nandakumar, and A. Nagar, Biometric template security,EURASIP
J. Adv. Signal Process., vol. 2008, pp. 113129, Jan. 2008.
[5] J. Galbally, F. Alonso-Fernandez, J. Fierrez, and J. Ortega-Garcia, A high
performance fingerprint liveness detection method based on quality related
features,Future Generat. Comput. Syst., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 311321, 2012.
[6] K. A. Nixon, V. Aimale, and R. K. Rowe, Spoof detection schemes, Handbook
of Biometrics. New York, NY, USA: Springer-Verlag, 2008, pp. 403423.
[7] ISO/IEC 19792:2009, Information TechnologySecurity TechniquesSecurity
Evaluation of Biometrics, ISO/IEC Standard 19792, 2009.
[8] Biometric Evaluation Methodology. v1.0, Common Criteria, 2002.
[9] K. Bowyer, T. Boult, A. Kumar, and P. Flynn, Proceedings of the IEEE Int. Joint
Conf. on Biometrics. Piscataway, NJ, USA: IEEE Press, 2011.
[10] G. L. Marcialis, A. Lewicke, B. Tan, P. Coli, D. Grimberg, A. Congiu, et al.,
First international fingerprint liveness detection competition LivDet 2009, in
Proc. IAPR ICIAP, Springer LNCS-5716. 2009, pp. 1223.
[11] M. M. Chakka, A. Anjos, S. Marcel, R. Tronci, B. Muntoni, G. Fadda, et al.,
Competition on countermeasures to 2D facial spoofing attacks, in Proc. IEEE IJCB,
Oct. 2011, pp. 16.
[12] J. Galbally, J. Fierrez, F. Alonso-Fernandez, and M. Martinez-Diaz, Evaluation
of direct attacks to fingerprint verification systems, J. Telecommun. Syst., vol. 47,
nos. 34, pp. 243254, 2011.
[13] A. Anjos and S. Marcel, Counter-measures to photo attacks in face recognition:
A public database and a baseline, in Proc. IEEE IJCB, Oct. 2011, pp. 17.
[14] Biometrics Institute, London, U.K. (2011). Biometric VulnerabilityAssessment
Expert Group [Online]. Available: BEAT: Biometrices Evaluation and Testing

TECHNIQUE
[Online]. Available: http://www.beat-eu.org/

[16] (2010). Trusted Biometrics Under Spoofing Attacks (TABULA RASA) [Online].
Available: http://www.tabularasa-euproject.org/
[17] J. Galbally, R. Cappelli, A. Lumini, G. G. de Rivera, D. Maltoni, J. Fierrez, et
al., An evaluation of direct and indirect attacks using fake fingers generated from
ISO templates,
Pattern Recognit. Lett., vol. 31,no. 8, pp. 725732, 2010.
[18] J. Hennebert, R. Loeffel, A. Humm, and R. Ingold, A new forgery scenario
based on regaining dynamics of signature, in Proc. IAPR ICB, vol. Springer LNCS-
4642. 2007, pp. 366 375.
[19] A. Hadid, M. Ghahramani, V. Kellokumpu, M. Pietikainen, J. Bustard, and M.
Nixon, Can gait biometrics be spoofed? in Proc. IAPR ICPR, 2012, pp. 32803283.
[20] Z. Akhtar, G. Fumera, G. L. Marcialis, and F. Roli, Evaluation of serial and
parallel multibiometric systems under spoofing attacks, in Proc. IEEE 5th Int. Conf.
BTAS, Sep. 2012, pp. 283288.
[21] D. Maltoni, D. Maio, A. Jain, and S. Prabhakar, Handbook of Fingerprint
Recognition. New York, NY, USA: Springer Verlag, 2009.
[22] R. Cappelli, D. Maio, A. Lumini, and D. Maltoni, Fingerprint image
reconstruction from standard templates, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., vol.
29, no. 9, pp. 14891503, Sep. 2007.
[23] S. Shah and A. Ross, Generating synthetic irises by feature agglomeration,in

Proc. IEEE ICIP, Oct. 2006, pp. 317320.
[24] S. Bayram, I. Avcibas, B. Sankur, and N. Memon, Image manipulation
detection, J. Electron. Imag., vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 041102-1041102-17, 2006.
[25] M. C. Stamm and K. J. R. Liu, Forensic detection of image manipulation using
statistical intrinsic fingerprints, IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Security, vol. 5, no. 3, pp.
492496, Sep. 2010.
[26] I. Avcibas, N. Memon, and B. Sankur, Steganalysis using image quality
metrics, IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. 12, no. 2, pp.
221229, Feb. 2003.
[27] S. Lyu and H. Farid, Steganalysis using higher-order image statistics, IEEE
Trans. Inf. Forensics Security, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 111119, Mar. 2006.

TECHNIQUE
BIBLIOGRAPHY

TECHNIQUE
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Digital image processing , S.jayaraman,S.Esakkirajan, Mc Graw hill
Publications.
2.Digital image processing, Rafael C.Gonzalez and Richard E.Woods,
Pearson education.
3.S.Sridhar, Digital image processing Oxford publishers.
4.Digital image processing and analysis , B.Chanda and D.Dutta Majumder, Prentice
Hall of India.
5.Digital signal processing ,P.ramesh Babu, Scitech
Publications.
6.www.scirp.org/journal/wsn
7.jwcn.eurasipjournals.com

TECHNIQUE
APPENDIX
APPENDIX

TECHNIQUE
SOURCE CODE
function varargout = DeskGUI(varargin)
% DESKGUI MATLAB code for DeskGUI.fig
% DESKGUI, by itself, creates a new DESKGUI or raises the existing
% singleton*.
% H = DESKGUI returns the handle to a new DESKGUI or the handle to
% the existing singleton*.
% DESKGUI('CALLBACK',hObject,eventData,handles,...) calls the local
% function named CALLBACK in DESKGUI.M with the given input arguments.
% DESKGUI('Property','Value',...) creates a new DESKGUI or raises the
% existing singleton*. Starting from the left, property value pairs are
% applied to the GUI before DeskGUI_OpeningFcn gets called. An
% unrecognized property name or invalid value makes property application
% stop. All inputs are passed to DeskGUI_OpeningFcn via varargin.
% *See GUI Options on GUIDE's Tools menu. Choose "GUI allows only one
% instance to run (singleton)".
% See also: GUIDE, GUIDATA, GUIHANDLES
% Edit the above text to modify the response to help DeskGUi
% Last Modified by GUIDE v2.5 31-May-2014 10:32:02
% Begin initialization code - DO NOT EDIT

gui_Singleton = 1;
gui_State = struct('gui_Name', mfilename, ...
'gui_Singleton', gui_Singleton, ...
'gui_OpeningFcn', @DeskGUI_OpeningFcn, ...
'gui_OutputFcn', @DeskGUI_OutputFcn, ...
'gui_LayoutFcn', [] , ...
'gui_Callback', []);
if nargin && ischar(varargin{1}) gui_State.gui_Callback =
str2func(varargin{1});
end
if nargout
[varargout{1:nargout}] = gui_mainfcn(gui_State, varargin{:}); else

TECHNIQUE
gui_mainfcn(gui_State, varargin{:}); end

% End initialization code - DO NOT EDIT
% --- Executes just before DeskGUI is made visible.
function DeskGUI_OpeningFcn(hObject, eventdata, handles, varargin) % This

function has no output args, see OutputFcn.
% hObject handle to figure
% eventdata reserved - to be defined in a future version of MATLAB
% handles structure with handles and user data (see GUIDATA)
% varargin command line arguments to DeskGUI (see VARARGIN)
% Choose default command line output for DeskGUI

handles.output = hObject;
% Update handles structure
guidata(hObject, handles);
% UIWAIT makes DeskGUI wait for user response (see UIRESUME)

% uiwait(handles.figure1);
% --- Outputs from this function are returned to the command line. function
varargout = DeskGUI_OutputFcn(hObject, eventdata, handles)
% varargout cell array for returning output args (see VARARGOUT);
% hObject handle to figure
% a = imread('icon\a.jpg');
% b=imresize(a,0.4);
% set(handles.input, 'CData', b);
% a = imread('icon\e.jpg');
% set(handles.exit, 'CData', b);
% a = imread('icon\h.jpg');
% set(handles.help, 'CData', b);
% a = imread('icon\p.jpg');

TECHNIQUE
% set(handles.Process, 'CData', b);

% Get default command line output from handles structure varargout{1}
= handles.output;
% --- Executes on button press in input.
function input_Callback(hObject, eventdata, handles)
% hObject handle to input (see GCBO)
AboutProject
% --- Executes on button press in Process.
function Process_Callback(hObject, eventdata, handles)
% hObject handle to Process (see GCBO)
close() InputProcess
% --- Executes on button press in help.

function help_Callback(hObject, eventdata, handles) % hObject
handle to help (see GCBO)
% eventdata reserved - to be defined in a future version of MATLAB % handles
structure with handles and user data (see GUIDATA) help
% --- Executes on button press in exit.
function exit_Callback(hObject, eventdata, handles)
% hObject handle to exit (see GCBO)
close()
function x=quafeature(img1,img2) clc
[m n]=size(img1);
a=double(img1);
b=double(img2); c=a^2;
d=b^2; e=(a-b)^2;
MSE=sum(sum((e)/(m*n)))
PSNR= 10*log(max(max((c)/ MSE)))+3;

TECHNIQUE
SNR=log(sum(sum((c)/(n*m*MSE))));
SC=sum(sum((c)/(d))); MD=max(mad(a-b));
AD=sum(sum((a-b)/(n*m))); NAE=(mad(a-
b))/(mad(a)); NXC=sum(sum((a*b)/c));
ed1=edge(img1,'sobel'); ed2=edge(img2,'sobel');
Ted=mad(ed1-ed2)
TED=sum(Ted);
C1=corner(img1);
D1=round(mean(C1));
CD1=D1(1);
C2=corner(img2);
D2=round(mean(C2));
CD2=D2(1);
TCD=(CD1-CD2)/(max(CD1,CD2));
SSI=ssim(img1,img2);
psnval=psnr(img1,img2,vv)
warndlg(psnval)
x=[MSE PSNR SNR SC MD AD NAE NXC TED TCD SSI];
LIST OF ACRONYMS

TECHNIQUE
PSNR Peak Signal to Noise Ratio

DWT Discrete Wavelet Transform
CWT Complex Wavelet Transform
DTCWT Dual Tree Complex Wavelet Transform
KPCA Kernel Principle Component Analysis
KFDA Kernel Fischer Discriminate Analysis
IQA Image Quality Assessment
IQM Image Quality Measures
FRIQM Full Reference Image Quality Measure
NR IQM No Reference Image Quality Measure
NIQE Natural Image Quality Evaluator

14em1d4702 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

14em1d4702 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FAKE BIOMETRIC DETECTION USING SOFTWARE

BASED LIVENESS DETECTION TECHNIQUE

For the Award of the Degree of

Under the Esteemed Guidance of

Mr. K.VENKATESULU, M.Tech.,

DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRONICS & COMMUNICATION

SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

Accredited by NAAC with A Grade

Detection Using Software based Liveness Detection Technique being

Project Guide Head of the Department

The satisfaction that accompanies the successful completion of every task

I extend my heartfelt gratitude to the Almighty for giving me strength in

I owe my special thanks to Dr. S. Ramesh Babu, M.Tech.,Ph.D., Secretary

I express my heartfelt thanks to Dr.T.Madhu, M.Tech., Ph.D.FIE.,MISTE,

I would like to express my sincere thanks to Mr.V.Srinivas,M.Tech.(Ph.D).,

I record with pleasure, of my gratitude to my Project guide

I am very much grateful to our M.Tech Coordinator Mr.S.Ravichand,

I would like to express my profound sense of gratitude to all the coordinators

Biometrics-based authentication systems offer obvious usability advantages

The experimental results, obtained on publicly available data sets of

Name Of The Content Page No.

1.4 ORGANISATION REPORT 5

Figure No. Name Of The Figure Page No.

Table No. Name of the Table Page No.

4.1 Different parameters measured for an image 35

SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY Page 1

Biometrics refers to metrics related to human characteristics. Biometrics

Behavioural characteristics are related to the pattern of behaviour of a person,

Since biometric identifiers are unique to individuals, so they provide high

Biometrics-based authentication schemes using fingerprints, face recognition,

SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY Page 2

Biometrics is authentic but not secret: Unlike passwords and cryptographic

Biometrics cannot be revoked or cancelled. Passwords, PINs, etc., can be

If once the Biometric is lost, it is compromised forever, why because

We demonstrate several methods to generate multiple cancellable identifiers

SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY Page 3

1.3 LITERATURE SURVEY:

After Rathaetal. formally defined the problem of cancellable biometrics (also

Biometric salting: This is similar to password salting in conventional crypto-

Fuzzy schemes: Another approach for constructing cancellable templates

SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY Page 4

SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY Page 5

SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY Page 6

2.1 EXISTING SYSTEM:

In recent years, the increasing interest in the evaluation of biometric systems

SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY Page 7

High computational delay,

Harmful to the human.

SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY Page 8

Fig 2.2 A stamp type dummy finger print

2.2.2 Duplication with Co-operation:

Fig 2.3: A wafer-thin silicon dummy fingerprint

To overcome this drawbacks, we demonstrate several methods to generate

SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY Page 9

SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY Page 10

SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY Page 11

The Proposed project can be enhanced from the existing technique by

SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY Page 12

indicate which template should be used for comparison 'Positive recognition' is a

Fig 3.1 Block diagram of Biometric system

Second is the identification mode, in identification mode the system

SWARNANDHRA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY Page 13