Packaging
In association with Mondi Packaging
Authentication technologies PDF Print E-mail
Written by Susanne Hasselmann, 2007   

The vast number of authentication technologies and the confusing - sometimes secretive - nature of the security technology industry often make it difficult for buyers to identify the best systems for their particular needs. Susanne Hasselmann provides an overview. 

Authentication technologies can play an important role in supporting brand protection strategies for rights holders. They can help reduce the risk of fraud by deterring criminals and allowing rights holders to track and authenticate products at different stages in the supply chain. As part of an overall brand protection strategy, technology can enhance brand integrity and value.

But it can't do it by itself. Authentication technology only succeeds when it matches the rights holder's individual requirements and works in harmony with activities such as investigations, customs liaison and consumer marketing.

All authentication technologies are concerned with making it possible to identify products as suspect. Some are also about confirming that something is genuine. These systems often involve a very high level of security and may be highly covert, depending on forensic laboratory analysis that cannot be used for authentication in the field.

In practice, therefore, most authentication technologies are used to identify suspect products and packages. Security levels - and hence the level of certainty that products are authentic - must be balanced against technology costs, ease of use and the amount of training needed to allow people to verify products or packaging.

The three main areas of technology associated with authentication are:
  • Anti-counterfeiting;
  • Anti-tamper;
  • Tracking.

Anti-counterfeiting technology

Counterfeiting involves making realistic copies of a product or package to deceive or defraud buyers. The technology used for anti-counterfeiting purposes is concerned with helping individuals identify potentially counterfeit products or establish that a particular product is genuine.

Anti-counterfeit technologies fall into two main categories, overt and covert, each associated with different authentication processes.

Overt technologies

Overt technologies are immediately visible to the observer and do not require any additional readers or equipment to allow a feature to be verified as genuine.

Overt systems enable members of the public or untrained inspectors to verify the product. They are often employed as a front line feature to alert inspectors or the public to the fact that a product may not be genuine. In most cases, overt features are combined with less visible, covert, features that enable trained inspectors to authenticate the product with greater certainty. Criminals will always try to copy all visible features, including overt authentication technology, as part of the task of producing a realistic copy.

Common overt technologies include holograms, optically variable inks, tear tapes and watermarks. Rights holders also use other, less secure, identifiers, such as perforations, shapes, colours, cuts and images, as 'first line' inspection features.

Covert technologies

Covert technologies are features that are not instantly recognisable. They require special readers or detectors to verify their presence and validity. People using these technologies will therefore need some training. Most covert systems are designed so that they can be used in the field, though ease of verification and time taken for authentication may vary.

Covert technologies include ultraviolet (UV) and infrared (IR) ink, both available in a wide range of colours and security levels. It is important to balance the need for security (often associated with commercial availability) with cost and ease of use.

Covert authentication also includes a group of technologies known as forensic systems. Forensic authentication involves either analysing the product in a laboratory or adding markers/taggants at a parts-per-billion level, which can later be detected using specialist readers or analysis. Forensic features are not widely used for day-to-day authentication. They are usually employed by trained in-house investigators once a product has been identified as potentially fake, as most forensic features require laboratory analysis.

You may also come across the term semi-covert technologies, which is sometimes used to refer to authentication features that are not immediately obvious but do not require the use of any specialist detectors. These features are often verified using a person's senses or by physically moving the object, which has resulted in the alternative term "interactive overt". Semi-covert technologies include print features like thermochromic ink and the familiar techniques everyone has seen on banknotes, such as microtext, raised intaglio printing and latent images that can only be seen from a certain angle.

Anti-tamper technologies

Anti-tamper technology is used to protect products from adulteration or replacement. Sleeves, seals, tapes, foils, caps, closures and labels have been developed that secure containers and packaging and ensure that the contents cannot be tampered with, replaced or diluted.

A tamper-evident feature that is intact assures the buyer or verifier that the container has not been tampered with and that the product is likely to be authentic. Anti-tamper features increase consumer confidence in a product's integrity. Anti-tamper technologies have traditionally been used for drinks (shrink sleeves and tamper-proof caps and closures) and in the pharmaceutical industry (blister packs), though there is now increasing use of this approach in other areas, including cosmetics and the food sector.

Tracking technologies

A tracking technology is a feature that says where a product was manufactured, where it has been and, sometimes, where it is supposed to be going. The main application for tracking technologies is usually increased efficiency within the supply chain, but tracking technologies can be used to authenticate products at the same time. By analysing tracking information, conclusions can be drawn as to a product's likely authenticity. On the other hand, a code on a package that identifies the right manufacturer or distribution route does not automatically prove the product inside is genuine. Criminals may open packages that incorporate barcodes or RFID tags and replace genuine products with counterfeits, and barcodes can easily be corrupted or destroyed.
 
Tracking technologies are also employed in the fight against unauthorised distribution, which is often linked to counterfeiting activity. Tracking systems can provide more visible and manageable supply chains, which are harder for counterfeiters to infiltrate. These technologies can also play an important part in tracing leads and enabling investigators to gather evidence for successful prosecutions.

Combination technologies

Most rights holders have a number of operational requirements that can be helped by the application of the right combination of technologies. For example, a brand owner or rights holder's priorities may include training and supporting customs, protecting the product from tampering and assuring supply chain integrity. The rights holder may therefore decide to combine three features - an overt authentication feature that will assist customs in their work, an anti-tamper feature, such as a seal, and a tracking number on the packaging to provide traceability at various points in the supply chain.

An example of such combination technology is the DuPont'Izon(r) authentication mark (Figure 5). It combines instant visual verification through intuitive overt features and multi-layered covert technologies. The photopolymer hologram labels have a 3D imaging technology that allows viewers to see around all four sides of an embedded image. It can also contain covert security features like flashing microtext that can only be read under magnification, or unique signatures that are verified through the use of portable readers. The tamper-resistant labels are used as a self-validating quality or end-use mark on everything from electronic consumer products, pharmaceuticals, luxury goods, government documents and food products and crops.

Conclusions

There are many different approaches to authentication and many different technologies, all with different strengths and weaknesses. Experience shows that there is no single 'Holy Grail' solution and that the secret of success lies in clear and detailed analysis of an organisation's problems and priorities.

Once the precise requirements are identified, they can be matched up with appropriate technologies, usually in combination, to deliver the support you need for an overarching brand protection strategy.

Susanne Hasselmann is Chair of the Anti-Counterfeiting Group's (ACG) Brand Protection Group (BPG). BPG members are a group of technology suppliers, consultants and investigators who provide free support and information to ACG members. For more information, please see www.a-cg.com
 
< Prev   Next >
[ Back ]