I have been reviewing the MOSIP Docs 1.2.0, particularly the section on Biometric Specifications and Biometric Devices , where the requirements for facial image quality are outlined:
“ICAO - Full frontal image, +/- 5 degrees rotation, 24 bit RGB, white background, 35 mm (width) x 45 mm (height).”
I have some questions regarding these specifications and would appreciate your clarification.
ICAO Requirements and Device/SBI Responsibility
Are these image requirements intended to be implemented by the facial capture device and its associated SBI program? Based on my understanding of ICAO standards, the specifications include numerous detailed conditions, such as facial expression, obstruction by hair, use of glasses, headwear, and accessories. These require strict compliance and precise detection. Is the responsibility for enforcing these standards assigned to the capture device and SBI? If so, this seems to present significant technical challenges for devices.
Relationship Between Device/SBI and Bio-SDK
I understand that the bio-SDK integrated within the registration client performs biometric image quality assessments. How does the quality judgment performed by the bio-SDK relate to that performed by the device/SBI?
Is it possible for a facial image to be deemed acceptable by the device (meeting the score specified in the capture request), but rejected by the bio-SDK? I believe differences in scoring algorithms may lead to variations, making it unlikely to achieve identical scores.
We have noted your query and will get back to you shortly with the necessary details. I’ll check with the team and provide you with an update accordingly.
We understand the importance of your query and want to assure you that our experts are currently reviewing the technical aspects to provide you with accurate and comprehensive responses.
We will update you as soon as we have more details. We truly appreciate your patience and will get back to you at the earliest.
ICAO Requirements and Device/SBI Responsibility
Are these image requirements intended to be implemented by the facial capture device and its associated SBI program? Based on my understanding of ICAO standards, the specifications include numerous detailed conditions, such as facial expression, obstruction by hair, use of glasses, headwear, and accessories. These require strict compliance and precise detection. Is the responsibility for enforcing these standards assigned to the capture device and SBI? If so, this seems to present significant technical challenges for devices.
[MOSIP] ICAO Compliance is mandatory and It is expected that every device partners comply with the ICAO standards
Relationship Between Device/SBI and Bio-SDK
I understand that the bio-SDK integrated within the registration client performs biometric image quality assessments. How does the quality judgment performed by the bio-SDK relate to that performed by the device/SBI?
Is it possible for a facial image to be deemed acceptable by the device (meeting the score specified in the capture request), but rejected by the bio-SDK? I believe differences in scoring algorithms may lead to variations, making it unlikely to achieve identical scores.
[MOSIP] The SBI returns a quality that is asked for, or a best frame possible. In scenarios where the asked quality score cannot be achieved, the SBI will try until the timeout period and return the best frame captured so far. The Biometric SDK is the decision maker that will allow or reject the captured image, as it’s expected to be in sync with the ID system expectation with respect to the FAR/FRR requirements. It’s possible for an SBI to give out an image, and the SDK to reject it.