Kickoff Meeting

October 30,2014
 Barbara Guttman

 Director, Information Access Division
 Looking back... some factoids:

 It was a long road to the BPR... 

 APB request announced on 08/06/2007

 The BPR published on 08/21/2009 (746 days)

 The final comment disposition spreadsheet was 

49 pages long (the BPR itself was 55 pages long).

 In 2009, there was only a handful of devices that 

were ready for market.

S

H

A

H

R

A

M

O

R

A

N

D

I
 But... its been over 5 years since publication, 

and much has changed.

 A mid-range desktop in 2008 could execute 10 

BIPS... A smartphone last year hit 18 BIPS.

 Sensors technology has improved (1000ppi 

fingerprints, megapixel resolution for even the 

most basic cameras devices)

 Data transmission systems have radically 

transformed (LTE, 802.11, 802.16, Bluetooth)

S

H

A

H

R

A

M

O

R

A

N

D

I
S

H

A

H

R

A

M

O

R

A

N

D

I

APB Request BPR Published

 We’ve come a long way... Lots of devices... 

FBI-NGI-RISC is in full swing... Lots of new 

interest...
 The time is right for an update.

 Good to see continued interest and support from 

everyone!

 Glad to have you here for the next evolution in 

Mobile ID!

S

H

A

H

R

A

M

O

R

A

N

D

I

Shahram Orandi

sorandi@nist.gov
 BPR originally published in 2009

 ANSI/NIST-ITL standard has incorporated the 

Acquisition Profiles, and they should be 

maintained in only one document

 New modalities have matured for biometric 

and forensic use in a mobile environment

 Referenced Standards have been updated 

and new ones developed

 Use cases have been further defined

 A mobile ID taxonomy has been developed

 New technology has been developed 

B

R

A

D

W

I

N

G
 Based on input from our member organizations, IBIA is 

respectfully requesting that the National Institute of 

Standards and Technology (NIST) consider convening a 

working group to discuss and review potential updates to 

NIST Special Publication 500-280 Mobile ID Device Best 

Practice Recommendation Version 1.0 (hereafter, Mobile ID 

BPR), which was published in July 2009. This publication is 

an important reference document for implementers and 

suppliers of mobile devices that incorporate biometric 

technology and is often cited in procurement documents 

and is used by suppliers in developing product 

specifications. A number of later documents and standards, 

such as ANSI/NIST-ITL 1-2011 (NIST Special Publication 500- 290), reference the Mobile ID BPR document extensively. 

However, we believe that some references in the Mobile ID 

BPR document may be outdated and should be refreshed. 

B

R

A

D

W

I

N

G
 The BPR is a NIST Special Publication, not 

part of the ANSI/NIST-ITL standard

 We will set up working groups to develop 

text for the new document

 Much of the document structure will be 

changed, since the Acquisition Profiles are 

now in the ANSI/NIST-ITL standard

 Drafts will be circulated for comment

 There will be a poll of interested parties to 

determine if the draft is acceptable prior to 

putting through the NIST publication 

procedure.

B

R

A

D

W

I

N

G
 Presentations in limited time slots

 Questions if there is enough time left in the slot

 Group Discussion in the afternoon

 Think about these questions during the day:

 What do we want to consider as ‘mobile’ in the BPR 

(wearable -- transportable – luggable --mixed ?)

 What modalities do we want to address?

 Should we include SOPs? Privacy issues? Etc. or just 

‘technical’ aspects ?

 Which areas are you willing to chair?

 Is there anything else that occurs to you as important?

B

R

A

D

W

I

N

G
presentations
A DHS S&T Perspective

Patricia Wolfhope

PM

DHD S&T

Resilient Systems Division
Referencing the Mobile BPR in RFI’s, RFPs, 

BAAs . . .

 Law Enforcement/Military Profiles make it easy

We have an opportunity to tune the next 

version to suite our needs

 Documentation tool for needs and requirements

 Use cases/scenarios already spelled out

 Mobile device characteristics in tabular form

 Guidance on Standards and Best Practices

13

P

A

T

T

Y

W

O

L

F

H

O

P

E
Forensics

 Latent finger printing on site at crime scenes

 Finger printing deceased persons

Access control

 To the mobile device itself, facility/area, 

obtaining services . . .

 One sentence in section 11.3.1 on Operator

 Authentication

BOLOs

 Ability to receive pictures and criminal history 

in the field on a mobile device

14
During a traffic stop, an unknown 

suspect pulled out a firearm and 

aimed it towards Officer Pierce. 

Officer Pierce fired his duty 

weapon toward the suspect. 

The suspect fled on foot with a 

weapon.

Weapon was located in a nearby 

back yard. 

15

Field Technician was called out to collect and run latent prints 

with Fusion at the site. Seventeen prints found to be medium 

to high quality were submitted and resulted in AFIS hits. An 

arrest was made.

Gun
16

Fusion Image

Hit Right Thumb

Suspect

PATTYWOLFHOPE
17

Workstation Lights Out

Lifted

Lights Out

Not Lifted

PATTYWOLFHOPE
 Acquisition planning tool for operational end 

users (currently Appendix B)

18

Description Law Enforcement Military

Biometric Data Collection

(image sensor capabilities)

flat fingerprints (FAP 10)

facial image (SAP 32)

FAP 45 or above

SAP 42 or above

Durability / Ruggedness Ingress Protection Rating: IP65

Must survive multiple drops at 

36 inches

Mobility Field Use and Office Use Vehicle Use (mounting and 

charging)

Communications 3G cellular

802.11 (WiFi)

Ethernet LAN (RJ-45 

connection, for office 

use)

4G LTE cellular

USB 2.0

Inputs Touchscreen

Virtual Keyboard

Physical keyboard peripheral 

(for office use)

OS Windows 7 Windows 8

Data Formatting Output(s) DHS OBIM IXM 6.0

DOJ FBI EBTS 9.3

DOD DFBA EBTS 3.0

Subject Record (data) Storage 200 subject records

(storing images, not 

templates)

Security Adherence to DHS 4300A 

and FBI CJIS Mobile 

Security policies

Data “at rest”, “in use” is 

protected and secured

Screen Size (inches, diagonal)

(includes platform + accessory)

Greater than 6 in Less than 12 in

Dimensions (inches)

(includes platform + accessory)

Less than 12x10x1.25 Less than 12x10x0.75

Weight (pounds)

(includes platform + accessory)

Less than 3 lbs Less than 2 lbs

OPTIONAL Reqrs

Card Reader FIPS-201-1 (e.g. PIV, PIV-I, CAC) 

[OPTIONAL]

Biometric Data Collection

(Iris and/or latent fingerprint 

image sensor capabilities)

IAP 20 or above [OPTIONAL]

Latent fingerprint capture 

capabilities [OPTIONAL]

P

A

T

T

Y

W

O

L

F

H

O

P

E
19

Characteristic Road Stop Latent Printing Deceased Check in/out

Biometric Data Collection

(image sensor capabilities)

Durability / Ruggedness

Mobility

Lighting

Communications

Inputs

OS

Subject Record (data) Storage

Docking

Battery

Security

Screen Size (inches, diagonal)

(includes platform + accessory)

Dimensions (inches)

(includes platform + accessory)

Weight (pounds)

(includes platform + accessory)

PIV/CAC Card Reader

Biometric Data Collection

(Iris and/or latent fingerprint 

image sensor capabilities)

PATTYWOLFHOPE
Rick Lazarick

Chief Czar Scientist - Biometrics

DHD S&T Support Contractor

Computer Sciences Corporation
“Use Cases” and “Scenarios”

 Based on 2 sources:

 NIST Mobile ID BPRS (2009)

 DHS S&T MBHD (Mobile Biometric Handheld Device) (2011)

 Note reversal of terms

R

I

C

K

L

A

Z

A

R

I

C

K
Figure 1 

- Tasks Across 4 Basic Scenarios

Data Capture

Matching

Network Network

Signal

Processing

Decision

Data Capture

Matching

Signal

Processing

Decision

Data Capture

Matching

Signal

Processing

Decision

Data Capture

Matching

Signal

Processing

Decision

(a)

(standalone)

(b) (c) (d)

Network Network

Network Network

RICKLAZARICK



Use Case 0 Use Case 1 Use Case 2 Use Case 3 

Local Law Enforcement

Law Enforcement Patrol Activities - Variation A (fingerprint)

X

Law Enforcement Patrol Activities - Variation B (face/iris)OX

Law Enforcement Public Event Disturbance

X

Border Protection

POE Identity Verification (Document Check)X

POE Identity Verification (US-VISIT) (Identity Check)

X

POE Identification and Verification (US-VISIT)

X

Maritime

Coast Guard Interdiction 

X

Maritime Interdiction Operation (DSB Task Force, 2007)X

First Responders & Emergency Management

Disaster Site Operations

X

DHS First Responders Access Control X

Access Control

Mobile Applications of TWICX

O

Immigration

Citizenship Application ProcessingX

Scenario Based on United States Border Patrol

Hospital Scenario

X

Identification of Deceased

X

Checkpoint Operations 

X

Joint Operation

X

Scenario TRADOC 

Hold, detain, release decisions regarding suspects

X

Identification of local nationals for base access

X

ScenarioStockton Police Department

Field Capture Latent Pilot

X

Patrol Mobile Identifications

X

County jail house booking, transfer, and release

OX

Scenarios

RICKLAZARICK
Define our terms and stick with them

Early agreement on configurations

Start with collection of detailed 

descriptions

R

I

C

K

L

A

Z

A

R

I

C

K

 Presentation not authorized for distribution

P

A

T

R

I

C

K

G

I

B

B

S
 RapidDNA capabilities have been developed 

and machines deployed around the world

 Some have the capability to export data 

using ANSI/NIST-ITL 1-2011 format

 FBI/CODIS is not now accepting 

ANSI/NIST_ITL format

 DHS is testing RapidDNA units in a field 

environment but not linking to CODIS

K

E

V

I

N

E

L

L

I

S

KEVINELLIS
KEVINELLIS
KEVINELLIS
KEVINELLIS
KEVINELLIS

KEVINELLIS
KEVINELLIS
K

R

I

S

T

E

N

G

R

E

E

N

E

Kristen K. Greene

NIST Visualization and Usability Group
 Disclaimer: Any mention of commercial 

products or reference to commercial 

organizations is for information only; it does 

not imply recommendation or endorsement 

by the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology nor does it imply that the 

products mentioned are necessarily the best 

available for the purpose.

K

R

I

S

T

E

N

G

R

E

E

N

E
 Usability

 Mobile device constraints

 WSABI (Web Services for Acquiring Biometric 

Information)

 Designing for touch and gesture

K

R

I

S

T

E

N

G

R

E

E

N

E
 It matters A LOT

 Better usability = faster task completion 

times, fewer errors

 Better usability = less training

K

R

I

S

T

E

N

G

R

E

E

N

E
 Usability is defined (ISO 9241, 1998) as "the 

extent to which a product can be used by 

specified users to achieve specified goals 

with effectiveness, efficiency and 

satisfaction in a specified context of use." 

K

R

I

S

T

E

N

G

R

E

E

N

E
 Effectiveness: Accuracy and completeness 

with which users achieve specified goals.

 Efficiency: Resources expended in relation 

to the accuracy and completeness with which 

users achieve goals.

 Satisfaction: Freedom from discomfort, and 

positive attitudes towards the use of the 

product.

 Context of use: Users, tasks, equipment 

(hardware, software and materials), and the 

physical and social environments in which a 

product is used.

K

R

I

S

T

E

N

G

R

E

E

N

E
 Smaller devices = BIGGER usability problems

 Smaller buttons and keys

 Onscreen keyboards

 Lack of tactile feedback

 Icon sizing and spacing

 Can’t port directly from desktop to mobile

K

R

I

S

T

E

N

G

R

E

E

N

E
 Sizes vary between mobile devices

 Based on physical differences in maximum 

available touchscreen real estate

 Sizes vary within a single device

 Depending on device orientation (landscape 

versus portrait mode)

 “splitting” the keyboard, which changes the 

relative distance between some keys more so 

than others

K

R

I

S

T

E

N

G

R

E

E

N

E
 Web Services for Acquiring Biometric 

Information

 Touchscreen interface for multimodal 

biometric capture

 Has undergone formal usability testing  https://github.com/NIST-BWS/wsabi2  http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8003  Design and Testing of a Mobile Touchscreen 

Interface for Multi-Modal Biometric Capture

KRISTENGREENE
 Consistency is key

 Regardless of the biometric modality or 

sensor, users perform same actions to 

capture, annotate, clear, and retake 

biometric data

 Same method of sensor setup regardless 

of biometric modality or sensor

K

R

I

S

T

E

N

G

R

E

E

N

E
KRISTENGREENE
KRISTENGREENE
KRISTENGREENE
KRISTENGREENE
KRISTENGREENE
 Design biometric acquisition software to be 

user- rather than sensor-centric

 Keep the core capture primitives constant

 Be consistent

 Use internationally tested, standardized 

symbols where possible 

 Be aware of differences between desktop 

and mobile computing paradigms

K

R

I

S

T

E

N

G

R

E

E

N

E
 http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8003

 Design and Testing of a Mobile Touchscreen 

Interface for Multi-Modal Biometric Capture

 kgreene@nist.gov

 bws.nist.gov

K

R

I

S

T

E

N

G

R

E

E

N

E
 Remote Subject Identification

 1:N based on iris only

 1:N multimodal

 Tablet device (peripheral or built in camera)

 Detainee Management

 1:1 based on iris only

 Tablet device, multiple use cases

 Verify identity before transfer of custody 

 Verify deportation at point of departure

 Track detainee movement using iris 

P

A

U

L

G

O

O

D

For Official Use Only
PETERALEX
PETERALEX
PETERALEX

PETERALEX
PETERALEX
PETERALEX
PETERALEX
PETERALEX
PETERALEX
PETERALEX
PETERALEX
PETERALEX
PETERALEX
PETERALEX
PETERALEX
PETERALEX
PETERALEX
Mary Theofanos

Yee-Yin Choong 

Specific hardware and software products identified in this report were used in order to perform the evaluations described. In no

case does such identification imply recommendation or endorsement by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, nor 

does it imply that the products and equipment identified are necessarily the best available for the purpose
 Part 1: General  Part 4: Fingerprint  Part 5: Face  Part 9: Vascular 

MARYTHEOFANOS
General guidance for use with all 

biometric systems/modalities  Move forward  Move backward  Move left  Move right  Failure  Success  Retry  Seek Assistance 

MARYTHEOFANOS
General guidance 

 General overlay guide for slap 

Hand positioning corrections:

 Move forward - thumb;

M

A

R

Y

T

H

E

O

F

A

N

O

S
Move your fingers up

Also have animated symbols 
Symbols Include:  Facial Image Capture  Look at a point  No Hats  No glasses  Move hair away from face 

MARYTHEOFANOS
Symbols Include:  Vascular Image 

Recognition

 Hand Vascular Image  Finger Vascular Image 

 

MARYTHEOFANOS
MARYTHEOFANOS
Context of Use

User &

Organizational

Requirements

Design Solution

Evaluation Users

25063 Context of Use Description

25064 User Needs Report

25065 User Requirements Specification

2506n User Interaction Specification

2506n Field Data Report

ISO/IEC 25062 CIF for Usability Test

Reports

25066 Evaluation Report

2506n User Interface Specification

ISO/IEC 15288 6.4.1 Stakeholders Requirements

Definition Process

ISO/IEC 15288 6.4.3 Architectural Design Process

ISO/IEC 15288 6.4.1 Stakeholder

Requirements Definition Process

ISO/IEC 15288 6.4.2 Requiremen 

Analysis Process

ISO/IEC 15288 6.4.8 Validation

Process

ISO/IEC 15288 6.4.6 Verification

Process

ISO/IEC 15288 6.4.4 Integration Process ISO/IEC 15288 6.4.4 Implementation Process

ISO 9241-210 Human Centered Design for Interactive Systems 
Mary Theofanos

National Institute of Standards and Technology

maryt@nist.gov

Acknowledge: Department of Homeland 

Security Science and Technology Directorate 

for their support of this research 

M

A

R

Y

T

H

E

O

F

A

N

O

S
Ross J. Micheals

NIST

Mobile Best Practices Update 

Workshop

30 Oct 2014
RossMicheals

Data Capture

Signal Processing

Matching

Decision

Data Capture

Network

Signal Processing

Matching

Decision

Data Capture

Signal Processing

Network

Decision

Matching

Data Capture

Signal Processing

Decision

Network

Matching

BPR recognizes 

that different 

components may 

be separated by a 

network
Data Capture

Interop Point

Signal Processing

Interop Point

Matching

Interop Point

Decision

• Generalize the 

“network” to an 

interoperability point; 

crossing a logical or 

physical boundary

• Multiple interop points 

(e.g. networks) are not 

just possible, but likely

RossMicheals
R

o

s

s

M

i

c

h

e

a

l

s

• Consider two components

• sensors: (data capture and signal processing)

• matchers: (matching and decision)

• Different ways they might be 

‘componentized’

• Illustrative and intended to stimulate 

discussion; not authoritative or a 

comprehensive treatment of all possible 

architectures
RossMicheals

• Most flexible with respect to 

interoperability points

• Explicit interoperability points 

may not be present; if they are, 

they would not require 

traversing a physical network

• Component communications 

could happen in within the same 

process or though a variety of 

interprocess communications

• Easier to make decisions that 

resist changes later
RossMicheals

• Network traversal as client device 

requests capture and gets results

• Degree of signal processing may 

vary (e.g., does a template or an 

image come back?)

• (Typically) wireless communication 

might be Bluetooth, NFC, WiFi, or 

proprietary; suggestion: make 

wired backup a best practice

• Physical and logical integration is a 

sliding scale, (e.g. an intelligent 

‘sleeve’)
R

o

s

s

M

i

c

h

e

a

l

s

• Ability to leverage a great deal 

of computational and 

communications capabilities

• Network: Wireless/wifi (with 

Ethernet backup?)

• Enables the use of the widest 

variety of sensors with mobile 

devices:

• Legacy

• Luggable (e.g., DNA)

• Fixed location (e.g., high 

resolution palm)
R

o

s

s

M

i

c

h

e

a

l

s

• Different scenarios may use a 

matcher at different stages 

during their usage

• Data input preparation for a 

deployment 

• Offline matching 

• Research & development

• Systems supporting these must 

be designed to accommodate 

stages in which a matcher may 

not be ‘online’
R

o

s

s

M

i

c

h

e

a

l

s

• Matcher lives “inside” device; i.e., 

local ‘watch list’ with persons of 

interest; 

• Similar to fully integrated client 

device

• Most flexible with respect to 

interoperability points

• Explicit interoperability points may not 

be present; if they are, they would not 

require traversing a physical network

• Component communications could 

happen in process or though a variety 

of interposes communications

• Easier to make decisions that resist 

changes later
R

o

s

s

M

i

c

h

e

a

l

s

• Different scenarios may require different 

payloads

• Scenario/deployment

• Centralized station specific to an incident 

response (ad hoc server)

• Proprietary or “local” data formats may 

be okay

• Large-scale matcher

• Cellular or satellite communications

• Formal, “curated” formats (think EBTS, 

ANSI/NIST)

• Branch office

• Matcher specific to a municipality; 

• Wifi or law enforcement-dedicated 

communications network

• Could be a hybrid of custom and curated 

formats
R

o

s

s

M

i

c

h

e

a

l

s

•Can be applied across a diverse set of 

architectures (even the all embedded)

• Use the protocols that underlie the web for 

machine-to-machine communications

• Evolution of existing practice (e.g., SMTP for 

IAFIS)

• Nearly universal; COTS friendly

• Well tested
R

o

s

s

M

i

c

h

e

a

l

s

• OASIS Biometrics TC 

http://tinyurl.com/biometricstc

• Biometric Identity Assurance Services (BIAS)

• biometric operations (enroll, verify, identify)

• OASIS Standard SOAP Profile; based on INCITS 

442:2010

• WS-Biometric Devices

• command and control of a biometric sensor

• OASIS Biometrics TC: Committee Specification Draft
R

o

s

s

M

i

c

h

e

a

l

s

rossm@nist.gov

http://bws.nist.gov

http:// tinyurl.com/biometricstc



DELIAMcGARRY

Slides presented separately
DAVIDJONES
DAVIDJONES
DAVIDJONES
DAVIDJONES
DAVIDJONES
DAVIDJONES
DAVIDJONES
TOMBUSS
Current situation Reasons for adding FAP55

 FAP45 (two finger) 

sensors OK for ABIS

field enrollment

 FAP45 not accepted 

by FBI/CJIS/Police for 

field booking.

 Need for mobile field 

enrollment is growing 

in US and international

 LES (film/TFT based) 

FAP55 sensor can take 

shape compatible 

with cell phone size 

and thickness goals.

 FAP55 (3.2” x 2”) size 

meets “type 4” 

enrollment standard 

suitable for field 

booking (10print rolls)
presentations
 ANSI/NIST-ITL has been updated to include 

new modalities that may be useful in mobile 

applications

 Voice

 DNA

 The Acquisition Profiles of the first BPR have 

been incorporated into the standard for face, 

fingerprint and iris.

 Updated data acquisition and data storage 

requirements and data transmission fields 

should be reflected in the new BPR

B

R

A

D

W

I

N

G
Based on DHS S&T Mobile Biometric 

Handheld Device (MBHD) Testing & 

Evaluation (2010-12)

 Work was sponsored by DHS S&T HSARPA 

Resilient Systems Division (RSD)

 Scope included:

 Scenario & Use Case Analysis 

 Requirements Development 

 Test Framework Development

E

R

I

C

K

U

K

U

L

A
 Structural decomposition that provides a 

defined way to depict a mobile biometric 

handheld device into 5 subsystems  Each subsystem consists of components  Hardware  Software

ERICKUKULA
Mobile Biometric Handheld Device
System

Subsystem Form Factor Biometrics Data Input Platform Communication

Chassis Imager (size/characteristics) Keyboard Processor & Memory Wired Connectivity

Ingress Protections Camera Programmable CPU RS-232*

Battery Casings Sensor Trackpad Memory Ethernet*

Access Panels Other Mouse Power USB*

External Connectors Processor/Controller Touchscreen Battery Firewire*

Switches Imager Housing Stylus Charging Circuit Docking Station Interface*

Frame Microphone Charge Status Indicator Wiegand Interface*

Seals Readers Charger Interface Wireless Connectivity

Protective Coating Magnetic Stripe Docking Station Interface* PAN

Illuminator Bar Codes Output BlueTooth

Optical Smart Card Speaker Body Area Networks

Flash RFID Printer ZigBee

Multi-Spectral MRZ / OCR Display Device LAN

IR Other Backlight IEEE 802.11 a/g/n

Storage IEEE 802.11af

Internal WAN

Fixed GSM/GPRS/EDGE/UMTS

External 1xEV-DO

Remove HSPA and HSPA+

Interfaces WiMAX (IEEE 802.16e and IEEE 802.16m)

SAM LTE and LTE-Advanced

SDIO Mobile Satellite Communication Systems

Memory Expansion Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS)

RS-232*

Ethernet*

USB*

Firewire*

Docking Station Interface*

Wiegand Interface*

Feedback

LEDs

Symbols/Pictograms

Aural

Tactile (Haptic)

N/A Data Acquisition Acquisition Operating System Network Management Protocols

Signal Processing Encoding/Decoding Applications Secure Communications

Segmentation Metadata General Status Monitoring Mobile Virtual Private Network

Quality Dynamic Workflow Manager

Feature Extraction Output Formatting

Template Generator* Formatting/Template 

Matching Compression

On-Board (Biometric Module) Encryption

Host/API/Software Transmission

Workstation Template Generator*

CMS Security

Data Management Physical Access Control

Storage Logical Access Control

Case Management Hard Drive Encryption

Template Generator* Cryptography 

Interface Control Template Generator*

Biometric Status Monitoring Protocol Management

Dynamic Workflow Manager

Spoofing/Evasion

Liveness

Biometric

*Exists in multiple subsystems

Hardware 

Components

Software 

Components

Mobile Biometric Handheld Device

E

R

I

C

K

U

K

U

L

A
HIIDE 5 Fusion SEEK II Mobile Ident II MC75 BlueCheck DSV2+ turbo MorphoIdent PIER-T

Fingerprint        

Single Flat        

Double Flat  

Rolled  

Face      Optional

Iris    

Single Iris  

Simultaneous  

On-board

Matching

       

*Trade names and company products have been listed in the text above. In no case does such identification imply recommendation or 

endorsement by Noblis or DHS S&T, nor does it imply that the products are necessarily the best available.
HIIDE 5 Fusion SEEK II Mobile Ident II MC75 BlueCheck DSV2+ turbo MorphoIdent PIER-T

Physical

Keyboard

  

Touchscreen       

Programmable

Buttons

   

Contact

Smartcard

 Optional Optional 

Contactless 

Smartcard Optional 

Barcode Reader  

Magnetic Stripe 

Reader



MRZ Encoding Optional

Readers

*Trade names and company products have been listed in the text above. In no case does such identification imply recommendation or 

endorsement by Noblis or DHS S&T, nor does it imply that the products are necessarily the best available.
HIIDE 5 Fusion SEEK II Mobile Ident II MC75 BlueCheck DSV2+ turbo MorphoIdent PIER-T

Weight

< 1 lb     

1 - 3 lbs  

> 3lbs  

Size (LxWxD) 5 x 8 x 3 8.74 x 4.61 x 2.91 8.75 x 5.5 x 3.5 6 x 3.15 x 1.30 6 x 3.1 x 1.7 4.45 x 1.69 x 0.87 7.3 x 7.3 x 2 5.2 x 2.6 x 0.7 3.5 x 5.0 x 2.6

S/M/L Large Large Large Medium Medium Small Large Small Medium

MIL-STD-810F    

IP Rating 54 65 65 54 54

*Trade names and company products have been listed in the text above. In no case does such identification imply recommendation or 

endorsement by Noblis or DHS S&T, nor does it imply that the products are necessarily the best available.
*Trade names and company products have been listed in the text above. In no case does such identification imply recommendation or 

endorsement by Noblis or DHS S&T, nor does it imply that the products are necessarily the best available.
HIIDE 5 Fusion SEEK II Mobile Ident II MC75 BlueCheck DSV2+ turbo MorphoIdent PIER-T

WiFi      Optional

Bluetooth       Optional 

GSM     Optional

CDMA     Optional

4G 

Ethernet  

USB         

Docking 

Station Optional 

GPS    Optional 

*Trade names and company products have been listed in the text above. In no case does such identification imply recommendation or 

endorsement by Noblis or DHS S&T, nor does it imply that the products are necessarily the best available.
 Analyzed over 30 COTS MBHD devices*

*Trade names and company products have been listed in the text above. In no case does such identification imply recommendation or 

endorsement by Noblis or DHS S&T, nor does it imply that the products are necessarily the best available.
Original BPR Sections Updates needed to reflect current technology

 Wireless Connectivity

 Cellular Connectivity

 GSM/GPRS/EDGE/UMTS

 CDMA/1XRTT/EVDO/EVDM

 HSDPA/WCDMA

 Satellite Communications

 802.11 b/g

 Bluetooth

 Global Positioning System (GPS)

 Integrated Wireless Antenna

 Wireless Connection Status

 Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)

 BlueTooth® (IEEE 802.15.3) 

 ZigBee (IEEE 802.15.4)

 6loPAN (IEEE 802.15.4)

 Mesh sensor networks (IEEE 802.15.5)

 Body Area Networks (IEEE 802.15.6) 

 Wireless Local Area Networks (WLANs)

 IEEE 802.11a/g/n/ac

 Wide Area Networks (WANs)

 HSPA and HSPA+

 WiMAX (IEEE 802.16e and IEEE 802.16m)

 LTE and LTE-Advanced

 Regional Area Networks (TV White Space) 

[IEEE 802.22]

 Mobile Satellite Communication Systems

 Global Navigation Satellite Systems 

(GNSS)

Note: List is non-exhaustive.

E

R

I

C

K

U

K

U

L

A
Environmental Profile Description

Indoor

(Normal)

office environments such as an office building, court of law, etc. 

Law Enforcement

(Moderate)

Indoor/outdoor, i.e. patrol officer or in patrol car

Military

(Extreme)

harsh environments, such as extreme temperatures, exposure to dust, 

sand, rain, water splashes, vibrations, and dropping of the device. 

E

R

I

C

K

U

K

U

L

A
 Several different types, some including multiple 

modalities (usually face and voice)

 Google glasses

 Near-field communications

 Disney’s MyMagic wristband

 Bionym electrocardiogram bracelets

 Cameras worn by police to record incidents

 Built-in facial recognition to compare against local 

watchlists

 Voice capture for later forensic analysis

 Medical device monitors

 Helmets with iris recognition (to ID wearer) in goggles

 Micro-feature recognition and gesture recognition 

 Biometrically verified weapons use

 And more!

B

R

A

D

W

I

N

G
 3D printing of body parts / Reconstructive surgery

 Spoofing and non-cooperative / un-cooperative behavior that is not likely or typical 

at fixed location units

 Failure-to-acquire protocols

 Privacy and use of data (particularly for DNA)

 Disposal of the mobile unit (including erasure of data)

 Some units may designed for one-time or limited use

 Protocols for data handling (including erasure of data) during field ops

 Remote or timed disabling operations of the unit (if stolen or misplaced)

 Mobile medical screening combined with biometrics

 Admissibility of data / match results for law enforcement applications

 Interoperability and verified linking of data

 Additional automated modalities (hair pattern growth on face, ear shape, ocular 

region, blood type, classifiers for ‘soft’ biometrics: height / weight / age / 

ethnicity / gender / tattoo and scar, etc. )

 Combination with / in devices designed to show exposure to explosives, illegal 

drugs, pathogens, etc.

 Combination with / in devices to detect health and responsiveness of persons under 

medical care, in battlefields, or under supervised detention or quarantine

 Operation in harsh environments and under dangerous situations

 Verification of identity of the unit operator and data entry personnel

B

R

A

D

W

I

N

G
James Cambier, Ph.D.

Crossmatch Technologies, Inc.

 MobileID BPR for iris images should be consistent 

with current and emerging standards:

 ISO/IEC 19794-6:2011 Information technology –

Biometric data interchange formats – Iris image data

 FDIS 29794-6 Information technology – Biometric 

sample quality – Iris image data

 Three areas of inconsistency

 Image MTF and pixel resolution

 Illumination wavelength

 Minimum distance (margin) from iris outer boundary 

to closest image boundary

J

A

M

E

S

C

A

M

B

I

E

R
Attribute MobileID BPR 19794-6 29794-6

Contrast 0.60 0.50

Spatial frequency, 

cycles/mm

2 2

Spatial sample 

rate, pixels/mm

10.8 – 21.0*,

no upsampling

10 15.7

*derived from specified range of iris diameter in pixels (140 –

210) and typical range of iris diameter of 10mm – 13mm

J

A

M

E

S

C

A

M

B

I

E

R
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Contrast

Cycles/mm

MTF Plot, Iris Imaging System

Recommendations:

• Specify spatial sampling rate directly in pixels/mm, not iris 

diameter

• Adopt MTF recommendations of 19794-6:2011. 

• Spatial sample rate of 10 pixels/mm is reasonable estimate 

of Nyquist rate for typical imaging system using COTS optics

• Allow upsampling from 10 pixels/mm if algorithms require 

higher minimum iris diameter (in pixels)

J

A

M

E

S

C

A

M

B

I

E

R
 Iris imaging systems use near-IR illumination 

within the 700-900 nm wavelength range

 Experience indicates that a wide range of 

wavelengths is needed to accommodate a 

variety of eye colors

 Mobile devices may require more limited 

spectral distributions to reduce size and 

power requirements 

J

A

M

E

S

C

A

M

B

I

E

R
MobileID BPR 19794-6 29794-6

Any 100 nm band 

within 700-900 

nm must contain 

≥ 35% of total 

energy

Illumination energy 

should be emitted at 

wavelengths in 700-

900 nm range, and 

should be ≥5° offaxis to prevent “redeye” effect

≥90% of energy 

shall be within 

700-900 nm band; 

≥35% of energy in 

700-900 nm range 

shall be within 

800-900 nm band

Recommendation: Adopt specification from 29794-6 to 

provide maximum design flexibility for mobile devices

J

A

M

E

S

C

A

M

B

I

E

R
Parameter MobileID

BPR 

19794-6 29794-6

Vertical 

margin

0.5 x 

diameter

0.2 x radius 0.2 x radius

Horizontal 

margin

0.25 x 

diameter

0.6 x radius 0.6 x radius

Recommendation: Adopt 19794-6, 29794-6 specifications

J

A

M

E

S

C

A

M

B

I

E

R
 Additional topics to be considered  Formation of subject matter groups  Selection of working group leads  Development of a timeframe

BRADWING