--- jtd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip> .. <snip> > > > > Ok so what are are claiming? > > that we are back to square one? or all the steps we took forward > > werent really forward? > > Yes. Mostly. For simple cases where physical prescence is essential > and can be counter verified by a person or where id verification need > > not be 100.000000 % it works well. If the It dept wants to weed out > false identity they are being stupid to think that existing biometric > > systems will work. In fact it would be the perfect play ground for > scamsters. If it is for the convienence of tax payers AES and > plainold passwords work well. >
So unless someone else counters the above it is very discouraging for more sophisticated applications. Ofcourse in my case, there will be a physical identification and the biometric is used more so to pull up information quickly rather than punching in numbers (such as member #ID).. so it may just work. -regards abhi __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
