1. CardTechnology.com. German savings banks reject biometrics at ATMs.
Card Technology Magazine, 2000; www.cardtechnology.com (accessed
Sept. 19, 2002).
2. Claburn, T. Man vs. machine. Smart Business 15, 4 (2002), 34.
3. CSI. 2003 CSI/FBI Computer Crime Survey, 2003; i.cmpnet.com/
gocsi/db_area/pdfs/fbi/FBI2003.pdf (accessed July 28, 2003).
4. Furnell, S.M., Dowland, P.S., Illingworth, H.M., and Reynolds, P.L.
Authentication and supervision: A survey of user attitudes. Comput. Sec.
19 (2000), 529–539.
5. Harvard Law Review. Evidence—fingerprint experts—Seventh Circuit
upholds reliability of expert testimony regarding the source of latent fingerprint—
United States v. Harvard, 260 F.3d 597. Harvard Law Rev.
115, 8 (2002), 2349–2356.
6. Jain, A.K., Prabhakar, S., and Pankanti, S. On the similarity of identical
twin fingerprints. Pattern Recog. 35 (2002), 2653–2663.
7. Lavonne, K. Grocer seeks loyalty boosts through biometrics. Amer. Banker
167, 87 (2002), 13.
8. Matyas, S.M., and Stapleton, J. A biometric standard for information
management and security. Comput. Sec. 19 (2000), 428–441.
9. Monrose, F. and Rubin, A.D. Keystroke dynamics as a biometric for
authentication. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 16 (2000), 351–359.
10. Mustonen-Ollila, E. and Lyytinen, K. Why organizations adopt information
system process innovations: A longitudinal study using diffusion of
innovation theory. Inf. Syst. J. 13, 3 (2003), 275–297.
11. Rogers, E.M. Diffusion of Innovations. Free Press, 2003.
12. State of New Jersey. Biometric Identifier Privacy Act. Assembly No. 2448.
State of New Jersey. 210th Legislature. Introduced June 13, 2002 by Joan
M. Quigley.
Card Technology Magazine, 2000; www.cardtechnology.com (accessed
Sept. 19, 2002).
2. Claburn, T. Man vs. machine. Smart Business 15, 4 (2002), 34.
3. CSI. 2003 CSI/FBI Computer Crime Survey, 2003; i.cmpnet.com/
gocsi/db_area/pdfs/fbi/FBI2003.pdf (accessed July 28, 2003).
4. Furnell, S.M., Dowland, P.S., Illingworth, H.M., and Reynolds, P.L.
Authentication and supervision: A survey of user attitudes. Comput. Sec.
19 (2000), 529–539.
5. Harvard Law Review. Evidence—fingerprint experts—Seventh Circuit
upholds reliability of expert testimony regarding the source of latent fingerprint—
United States v. Harvard, 260 F.3d 597. Harvard Law Rev.
115, 8 (2002), 2349–2356.
6. Jain, A.K., Prabhakar, S., and Pankanti, S. On the similarity of identical
twin fingerprints. Pattern Recog. 35 (2002), 2653–2663.
7. Lavonne, K. Grocer seeks loyalty boosts through biometrics. Amer. Banker
167, 87 (2002), 13.
8. Matyas, S.M., and Stapleton, J. A biometric standard for information
management and security. Comput. Sec. 19 (2000), 428–441.
9. Monrose, F. and Rubin, A.D. Keystroke dynamics as a biometric for
authentication. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 16 (2000), 351–359.
10. Mustonen-Ollila, E. and Lyytinen, K. Why organizations adopt information
system process innovations: A longitudinal study using diffusion of
innovation theory. Inf. Syst. J. 13, 3 (2003), 275–297.
11. Rogers, E.M. Diffusion of Innovations. Free Press, 2003.
12. State of New Jersey. Biometric Identifier Privacy Act. Assembly No. 2448.
State of New Jersey. 210th Legislature. Introduced June 13, 2002 by Joan
M. Quigley.
I know a great deal about this inquiry in the wake of perusing articles about the techniques segment of an examination paper. The techniques segment of an examination paper gives the data by which an investigation's legitimacy is judged. In this manner, it requires an unmistakable and exact depiction of how an investigation was done and the justification for why explicit test methodology was picked. Along these lines, the techniques area structure should: depict the materials utilized in the examination, clarify how the materials were set up for the investigation, portray the exploration convention, clarify how estimations were made and what counts were performed, and state which measurable tests were done to dissect the information. When all components of the strategies segment are buy assignment UK, ensuing drafts should concentrate on the most proficient method to show those components as unmistakably and intelligently as could reasonably be expected. The portrayal of arrangements, estimations, and the convention ought to be sorted out sequentially. For lucidity, when a lot of detail must be introduced, the data ought to be exhibited in sub-areas as indicated by the point.
ReplyDelete