Documents to download

Biometrics Technologies

Key points:

  • Biometric attributes are generally universal and permanent. They can be measured and analysed to produce a digital signature that is sufficiently distinctive to an individual to enable their identification.
  • Biometric technologies can be used to check that someone is who they say they are (for example, checking that someone’s face matches the photo in their passport), or to identify an unknown person based on a previous obtained record (for example, comparing a fingerprint from a crime scene to a fingerprint database of previous offenders).
  • Use of biometric technologies is increasing, driven by: the perceived vulnerability and inconvenience of passwords and other conventional proofs of identity; increasing use of mobile devices with biometric capabilities; and the growing power of biometric systems, which have benefited from advances in computing technologies such as artificial intelligence.
  • There is currently debate over whether current regulation of biometrics is adequate, especially for police use of facial recognition technology, which has increased in recent years.
  • The use of biometric technologies raise various challenges, including concerns around privacy, public acceptance, and the potential for bias.
  • The Home Office has just published a delayed strategy for Biometrics.


POSTnotes are based on literature reviews and interviews with a range of stakeholders, and are externally peer reviewed. POST would like to thank interviewees and peer reviewers for kindly giving up their time during the preparation of this briefing, including:

  • Aaron Amankwaa, Northumbria University*
  • Big Brother Watch*
  • Biometrics and Forensics Ethics Group*
  • Biometrics Commissioner*
  • Centre for Applied Science and Technology (now the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory)*
  • Dr. Carole McCartney, Northumbria University*
  • Dr. Gabrielle Samuel, King’s College London*
  • Dr. Matthias Wienroth, Newcastle University*
  • Dr. Richard Guest, University of Kent*
  • Forensic Science Regulator*
  • Government Office for Science*
  • Home Office*
  • IBM*
  • Information Commissioner’s Office
  • National Physical Laboratory*
  • NEC
  • National Police Chiefs’ Council*
  • Privacy International*
  • Prof. Angela Sasse, University College London
  • Prof. Denise Syndercombe-Court, King’s College London*
  • Prof. Ivan Martinovic, University of Oxford*
  • Prof. Josef Kittler, Surrey University*
  • Prof. Mark Nixon, University of Southampton*
  • Prof. Sarah Stevenage, University of Southampton*
  • Surveillance Camera Commissioner*
  • TechUK*

*Denotes those who acted as external reviewers of the briefing.

Documents to download

Related posts

  • The COVID-19 Winter Plan, published 23 November, relies on three factors to provide the UK with a “route back to normality”: vaccines, treatments and testing. In addition to PCR testing, lateral flow devices are now being rolled out across England and Wales for the rapid testing of certain occupational groups, community testing and as an alternative to self-isolation following exposure to the virus. How well validated have these tests been? Are they accurate enough for their proposed purposes? And how have they performed to date in mass testing trials?

  • The use of technology to perpetrate domestic abuse, referred to as tech abuse, has become increasingly common. Domestic abuse charity Refuge reported that in 2019, 72% of women accessing its services said that they had been subjected to technology-facilitated abuse. Common devices such as smartphones and tablets can be misused to stalk, harass, impersonate and threaten victims. Some groups have raised concerns that the growing use of internet-connected home devices (such as smart speakers) may provide perpetrators with a wider and more sophisticated range of tools to harm victims. How is technology being used to perpetrate domestic abuse, how can this be prevented and what role can technology play in supporting victims?