At the workshop, I talked to James about using make-up to create different lines that would be picked up, ie, a wider nose drawn in brightly. He was very skeptical. Adam On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 04:42:33AM +0100, Adam Back wrote: | There was a paper at Privacy Enhancing Technologies 03 on this topic: | | "Engineering Privacy in Public: Confounding Face Recognition", James | Alexander and Jonathan Smith. | | It's full of pictures of one of the authors with various forms of | facial makeup, glasses, hats, stockings (over head bank-robber style), | dazzled camera with pen-light laser, etc, plus an empirical analysis | of the disguise efficacy in hiding identity against I think a face | recognition system called FERET. | | A copy seems to be online here: | | http://petworkshop.org/preproc/07-preproc.pdf | | Adam | | On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 01:42:58AM +0200, Thomas Shaddack wrote: | > Vnity is about as old as mankind. With vanity, various ways come to change | > one's appearance. | > | > Wider lips. Narrower mouth. Wider eyes. Different shape of eyes. Name a | > facial feature, there is a way to enhance or suppress it. | > | > Face-recognition systems rely on visual appearance. They typically need | > edges - edges of mouth, edges of eyes...; one popular algorithm for | > indexing a face is recognizing these points and measuring their distance. | > A little amount of properly applied pigment could shift these values by | > couple percents. | > | > So low-tech device a lipstick is could be a potential tool for lowering | > the probability of a successful identification by face recognition. Ladies | > often carry many more similar "terrorist tools" in their purses. | > | > Opinions, comments? -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume