Smart Borders Pilot German Experiences

IBPC 2016

NIST, Gaithersburg 05.05.2016

Proposal: EU ENTRY / EXIT SYSTEM (EES)

Source: EU KOM , factsheet on EES, Brussels, 6.4.2016 Slide 2

Proposal: EU ENTRY / EXIT SYSTEM (EES)

Source: EU KOM , factsheet on EES, Brussels, 6.4.2016 Slide 3

Smart Borders Pilot in 2015

(March – September, 2015)

Focus on Technology state of play Which & “how many” biometrics? ABC & Self-Service Kiosks Operational & end user experiences

German Participation

EU Pilot Frankfurt Airport (FRA)

• FP Enrolment (4 / 8 / 10 FP) • Automatic Border Control (ABC at Exit)

Extended National Pilot Additional Location: Seaport Warnemünde Additional Biometrics: Facial Image + Iris Additional Test Cases (many) Unique within EU pilot:

• End-2-End Pilot (with backends) • Full national integration • Focus on processes

Slide 5

Smart Borders Pilot – National Integration

Slide 6 Slide 6

Equipment Enrolment Morpho: „Fingerprint on the Fly“ (FOTF)

Crossmatch: The „new“ Guardian

Iris ID - iCAM TD100

eGates at Exit

Allowing TCNs to use ABCs during Exit

Participating TCNs

ARE, ARG, AUS, AZE, CAN,

CHL, CHN, ISR, JPN, KAZ,

KOR, MDA, MKD, MYS,

NZL, QAT, RUS, SGP, SRB,

TGO, THA, TJK, TUR, TWN,

USA, VEN

Slide 8

Video

(5 min)

Various findings on Smart Borders

Lessons Learned on • Duration & Quality of data • Architecture & Organization • New Technologies & Biometrics

Eu-LISA Pilot Report

German Pilot Report • In addition to eu-LISA report • in english

Slide 10

Duration

Slide 11

Duration First Entry for Visa Exempt

34

167

120

89

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Baseline EES 10FP+FI EES 8FP+FI EES 4FP+FI

Dura

tion,

med

ian

[s]

Duration of border control process for TCNVE, entry, different biometrics, different devices, different quality thresholds.

Slide 12

Duration Distribution

Seite 13 Slide 13

Duration: Example Subsequent Entry

120

72

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

8FP+FI 4FP

Initial Entry Subsequent entry

Dura

tion,

med

ian

[s]

Comparison of first and subsequent entries for visa-exempt travellers (TCNVE)

Slide 14

Duration: Distribution per Scanner

30

32

25

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Existing contact scanner New contact scanner New contactless scanner

Dura

tion,

med

ian

[s]

Duration of fingerprint capture process depending on scanner technology (TCNVE, entry, 8 fingers, eu-LISA final threshold)

Slide 15

Fingerprints

Slide 16

Quality Assessment NFIQ

Seite 17

Quality Assessment NFIQ2 (beta)

Seite 18 Slide 18

Quality: Time vs. Threshold

“Initial”: Retry policy on NFIQ 2/2/2/2/3/2/2/2/2/3 “eu-LISA Final”: Retry policy on NFIQ 3/3/3/3/4/3/3/3/3/4

50,6%

37,4%

69,1% 77,0%

15,5%

11,1%

9,7% 6,2%

33,9%

51,5%

21,1% 16,8%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

New contact New contactless New contact New contactless

Initial eu-LISA final

Amou

nt o

f tot

al c

aptu

res [

%]

3

2

1

Distribution of the capture count depending on scanner type & quality threshold

Slide 19

Start with high quality threshold “Initial”. BUT number of retries were too high

ONLY used auto-capture by device for interim period. THAT was quick, but not comparable with rest of EU

Compromise: “eu-LISA final” Reduced threshold Number of retries “feasible”

Quality: Time vs. Threshold

“Initial”: Retry policy on NFIQ 2/2/2/2/3/2/2/2/2/3 “eu-LISA Final”: Retry policy on NFIQ 3/3/3/3/4/3/3/3/3/4

85

78

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Initial eu-LISA Final

NFI

Q (1

=100

, 2=8

0, 3

=60,

4=4

0,5=

20)

Distribution of fingerprint quality depending on quality thresholds

Slide 20

Quality loss by reducing threshold is measurable BUT adequate

Recommendation: accept lower quality and optimize time wise

Face & Iris

Slide 21

Live Capturing of Facial Image

In general quality positive Sometimes not sharp, too

close etc.

Changes to infrastructure Handling of camera

Slide 22

Quality: „chip“ versus „live“

Slide 23

Iris

Positive Very robust to environment

conditions

Slide 24

Quality Assessment Iris

Slide 25

German Report: Findings & Requirements

Maximum of available biometrics (“10fp or 8fp in combination with other”)

Biometric-driven – not passport-driven “Crossover” – architecture (EES, VIS …) Long retention period (5 yeas like VIS) … De-Duplication for 1st line Biometric Enrolment:

Reduce threshold, but take “as much as possible”

….many more (in the report)

Facilitation

Security

Efficiency

Slide 26

National Plans for 2016

German Smart Borders Pilot –Part Two Integration of Self-Service-Systems Adapting to new EU COM Proposal

EU level: Negotiation / Design

… and move towards a better integration Slide 27

Thank you for your attention!

Fares Rahmun Fares.Rahmun@bva.bund.de

+49 228 99 358 1548

Federal Office of Administration (Bundesverwaltungsamt)

www.bunderverwaltungsamt.de/en

Smart Borders Pilot�German Experiences��IBPC 2016�NIST, Gaithersburg�05.05.2016��Proposal: EU ENTRY / EXIT SYSTEM (EES)Proposal: EU ENTRY / EXIT SYSTEM (EES)Smart Borders Pilot in 2015German ParticipationSmart Borders Pilot – National IntegrationEquipment EnrolmenteGates at ExitFoliennummer 9Various findings on Smart BordersFoliennummer 11Duration First Entry for Visa Exempt Duration DistributionDuration: Example Subsequent EntryDuration: Distribution per ScannerFoliennummer 16Quality Assessment NFIQQuality Assessment NFIQ2 (beta)Quality: Time vs. ThresholdQuality: Time vs. ThresholdFoliennummer 21Live Capturing of Facial ImageQuality: „chip“ versus „live“IrisQuality Assessment IrisGerman Report: Findings & RequirementsFoliennummer 27Foliennummer 28