@wil007 Hey mate. IMO, it really is just a cover your ar$e...

@wil007

Hey mate.

IMO, it really is just a cover your ar$e statement. This is an analyst putting his assessment out there and obviously independent results will go a long way in proving up the tech to the wider mkt. The analyst is covering the risk of the potential that it has issues of any sort, which can happen obviously.

Agree that the independent testing will most likely provide those answers for sure as well as what Mak said. Logic dictates that you wouldn't throw the money and reputation out there for an independent test unless you were pretty confident you had done your homework and that it will pass - worst case IMO is that there may be portions highlighted in the process / hardware / algos that require some refinement.

Not the end of the world by a long stretch if there was a minor issue.

They initial key markers have been hit in the lab which are the accepted statistical benchmarks against the industry / competitors as Ann'd - FAR, FRR, FTE etc.

Like any new tech or product though, testing in house can provide a fairly sterile controlled environment where sometimes the benchmarks you seek to hit can be obtained in an orderly manner.

However, once you put that product or tech into a commercial real world environment then there are numerous other factors that can come into play. Things like high volume traffic use, ability to process multiple requests simultaneously, ability to identify unaware of as yet spoof or replay attacks etc etc. The testing maybe wants to include those "human" real world commercial environments as well as the expected physical hardware / software tests?

There are also the additional benchmarks / standards you prob want to hit from recognised bodies like NIST, ASD (Aust Signals Directorate), ISO etc and I suspect these may be what the testing will also include.

Couple of links for you (and anyone else) that I use in tech / cyber security product research that you can surf around in at your leisure. Also posted previously the iBeta test facility in the US link which has some info around NIST accreditations, testing standards etc. Also for example the DHS (Dept Homeland Security) created a whole new real life type test facility in Maryland last year to test their current airport biometric entry/exit program as they role it out. It's set up to test multiple biometric devices / tech as they need to.

http://www.ibeta.com/our-software-quality-services/biometrics-testing/

https://www.dhs.gov/blog/2014/07/03/dhs-st-and-cbp-announce-opening-maryland-test-facility

http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/PubsNISTIRs.html
(search biometric for various publications if you can be bothered reviewing )

http://www.asd.gov.au/infosec/epl/

PS @wil007 ....just read your other post on moby. Waiting to see the additional modality they have added when the Patent adjustment is lodged as camera/ hardware wise, I don't think will be an issue as CSRA operates in visible light spectrum currently which just means a fairly standard camera that are already in use not needing NIR at this point. Depends on what the additional modality is though and what hardware it needs?

GLTA....