which pl for fingerprint scanner

[rouge]

if i were to choose a programming language for a thesis level project that uses a fingerprint scanner what would be the best choice:

1) Java
2) C++
3) VB6

if none of them would come close to a good choice can anybody in here recommend one?

thanks :D

[cscgal]

I'm a bit confused. How do you want to go about doing this? In other words, at a low level interacting with fingerprint scanner equipment? Using an external program to scan in the fingerprint and then compare the graphic image with an "authentic" one?

[TallCool1]

if i were to choose a programming language for a thesis level project that uses a fingerprint scanner, what would be the best choice:

1) Java 2) C++ 3) VB6

If you are interfacing with a piece of hardware -- a stand-alone fingerprint scanner --C++ would probably be best, since the hardware drivers are likely written in C anyway. There is also a speed issue; C++ is a compiled language, the other two are at least partly interpreted, at best semi-compiled.

Important: be aware that fingerprint scanners, it turns out, are very easy to fool; a Japanese researcher, using moulded-gelatin "fingers" and lifted prints, found that they could be fooled about 75% of the time.

[rouge]

TallCool1,

I think you're right about C++. Although I would have preferred to use Java 2 to be able to learn more about the language, C++ would most prolly be best because of the hardware i intend to use.

However, i plan to enhance my project by making it run on a network. I'm not sure yet whether I will put the fingerprint scanning procedure on the client or server application or both. How effective do you think will C++ be if i'm going to make a system that runs on a network and handles a large database?

Thanks for the info :P

[cscgal]

I think I'm a bit confused. None of these languages are web-based unless you plan on porting to *.NET or JSP, etc.? I'm sure this isn't what you're doing though, right? You intend to strictly work with a (Windows I suppose?) application? Or is this for a Unix-based network?

[rouge]

Its not gonna be web-based. Though if I would be able to do that and answer with full confidence security issues that would be thrown at me during my thesis defense, that would be most excellent ;p

I'm not that familiar with Unix, so most probably its gonna be Windows-based. The project I plan to create is a voting system/software that makes use of a fingerprint scanner. Right now we're still at the research stage for the feasibility of this project.

[tomthehun]

Important: be aware that fingerprint scanners, it turns out, are very easy to fool; a Japanese researcher, using moulded-gelatin "fingers" and lifted prints, found that they could be fooled about 75% of the time.[/QUOTE]

Colud you refer to this article?

[darkagn]

Hi tomthehun,

Welcome to daniweb. I don't mean to be rude, but this thread was last used over 4 years ago, so I am not sure that you will get an answer to your question. Please check the date of forums before posting in them.

Cheers
darkagn

[jwenting]

especially since OP has apparently never been back after getting his answer to it...

[Salem]

> especially since OP has apparently never been back after getting his answer to it...
Nor has the drive-by thread-bumper for that matter ;)

But to see how easy it is, watch Mythbusters on the Discovery Channel, and watch the "Crimes and Mythdemenors" episode. Fingerprint scanners do not come out of it as nice and shiny as the manufacturers would have you believe.

You might want to consider is the thing you're protecting worth losing a body part to the unscrupulous crooks who want whatever it is you've got?

[jwenting]

yah, they just reran that episode for the Xth (X > some very large number) here as part of the constant rerunning of the early seasons (makes it cheaper for them, they don't have to buy new shows from Discovery US...).

I wonder if they selected a known flawed scanner on purpose. Going from a single sample of a single model and determining the entire class of devices doesn't work is of course not good science (but great entertainment).