Circular Gabor wavelet algorithm for fingerprint liveness detection

  • Authors

    • Olufade F.W. Onifade University of Ibadan
    • Paul Akinde University of Ibadan
    • Folasade Olubusola Isinkaye Ekiti State University, Ado-Ekiti
    2020-01-11
    https://doi.org/10.14419/jacst.v9i1.29908
  • Biometric, Fingerprint, Liveness Detection, Spoof, Support Vector Machine, Texture Segmentation.

  • Abstract

    Biometrics usage is growing daily and fingerprint-based recognition system is among the most effective and popular methods of personality identification. The conventional fingerprint sensor functions on total internal reflectance (TIR), which is a method that captures the external features of the finger that is presented to it. Hence, this opens it up to spoof attacks. Liveness detection is an anti-spoofing approach that has the potentials to identify physiological features in fingerprints. It has been demonstrated that spoof fingerprint made of gelatin, gummy and play-doh can easily deceive sensor. Therefore, the security of such sensor is not guaranteed. Here, we established a secure and robust fake-spoof fingerprint identification algorithm using Circular Gabor Wavelet for texture segmentation of the captured images. The samples were exposed to feature extraction processing using circular Gabor wavelet algorithm developed for texture segmentations. The result was evaluated using FAR which measures if a user presented is accepted under a false claimed identity. The FAR result was 0.03125 with an accuracy of 99.968% which showed distinct difference between live and spoof fingerprint.

     

     

     

  • References

    1. [1] A. Czajka, Pupil Dynamics for Iris Liveness Detection. IEEE Trans. Information Forensics and Security 10(4) (2015) 726-735. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIFS.2015.2398815.

      [2] C. Yuan, X. Sun, R. and Lv, Fingerprint Liveness Detection based on Multi-scale LPQ and PCA. China Communications 13(7) (2016) 60-65. https://doi.org/10.1109/CC.2016.7559076.

      [3] J. Galbally, F. Alonso-Fernandez, J. Fierrez, and J. Ortega-Garcia, A High Performance Fingerprint Liveness Detection Method based on Quality Related Features. Future Generation Computer Systems 28(1) (2012) 311-321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2010.11.024.

      [4] T. de Freitas Pereira, J. Komulainen, A. Anjos, J. M. De Martino, A. Hadid, M. Pietikäinen, and S. Marcel, Face Liveness Detection using Dynamic Texture. EURASIP Journal on Image and Video Processing, 2014(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-5281-2014-2.

      [5] B. Tan, and S. Schuckers, Spoofing Protection for Fingerprint Scanner by Fusing Ridge Signal and Valley Noise. Pattern Recognition 43(8), (2010) 2845-2857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2010.01.023.

      [6] Z. Xia, C. Yuan, R. Lv, X. Sun, N. N. Xiong, andY. Q. Shi, A Novel Weber Local Binary Descriptor for Fingerprint Liveness Detection. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2018.2874281.

      [7] R. P. Sharma, and S. Dey, Fingerprint Liveness Detection using Local Quality Features. The Visual Computer (2018) 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00371-018-01618-x.

      [8] H. U. Jang, H. Y. Choi, D. Kim, J. Son, and H. K. Lee, Fingerprint Spoof Detection using Contrast Enhancement and Convolutional Neural Networks. In International Conference on Information Science and Applications (2017) (pp. 331-338). Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4154-9_39.

      [9] L. Ghiani, D. A. Yambay, V. Mura, G. L. Marcialis, F. Roli, and S. A Schuckers, Review of the Fingerprint Liveness Detection (Livdet) Competition Series: 2009 to 2015. Image and Vision Computing 58 (2017) 110-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imavis.2016.07.002.

      [10] A. Sequeira, and J. Cardoso, Fingerprint Liveness Detection in the Presence of Capable Intruders. Sensors, 15(6), 2015, 14615-14638. https://doi.org/10.3390/s150614615.

      [11] E. Marasco, and A. Ross, A survey on anti-spoofing schemes for fingerprint recognition systems. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 47(2) (2015) 28. https://doi.org/10.1145/2617756.

      [12] A. T.oosi, A. Bottino, S. Cumani, P. Negri, and P. L. Sottile, Feature Fusion for Fingerprint Liveness Detection: A Comparative Study. IEEE Access 5 (2017) 23695-23709. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2763419.

      [13] S. P. Potty, V. Rohith, and S. V. Sylish, Fingerprint Liveness Detection. International Journal of Pure and Applied mathematics 18(20) (2018) 283-287. https://acadpubl.eu › hub › 2018-118-21.

      [14] L. Ghiani, A. Hadid, G. L. Marcialis, and F. Roli, Fingerprint Liveness Detection using Binarized Statistical Image Features. In 2013 IEEE sixth international conference on biometrics: theory, applications and systems (BTAS) (2013) (pp. 1-6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/BTAS.2013.6712708.

      [15] D. Gragnaniello, G. Poggi, C. Sansone, L. Verdoliva, Fingerprint Liveness Detection Based on Weber Local Image Descriptor. In 2013 IEEE workshop on biometric measurements and systems for security and medical applications (2013) (pp. 46-50). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/BIOMS.2013.6656148.

      [16] S. Kim, B. Park, B. S. Song, and S. Yang, Deep Belief Network based Statistical Feature Learning for Fingerprint Liveness Detection. Pattern Recognition Letters 77, (2016) 58-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2016.03.015.

      [17] S. Khan, M. Hussain, H. Aboalsamh, G. Bebis, A comparison of different Gabor feature extraction approaches for mass classification in mammography. Multimedia Tools and Applications 76(1) (2017) 33-57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-015-3017-3.

      [18] R. K. Dubey, J. Goh, and V. L. Thing, Fingerprint Liveness Detection from Single Image Using Low-Level Features and Shape Analysis. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 11(7) (2016) 1461-1475. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIFS.2016.2535899.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    F.W. Onifade, O., Akinde, P., & Olubusola Isinkaye, F. (2020). Circular Gabor wavelet algorithm for fingerprint liveness detection. Journal of Advanced Computer Science & Technology (JACST), 9(1), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.14419/jacst.v9i1.29908

    Received date: 2019-09-24

    Accepted date: 2019-10-24

    Published date: 2020-01-11