In a number of social activities such as various business transactions including product guarantee and contract, an entrance and exit procedure, an access procedure on information, etc., a process for validating things, authority or a person himself or herself is very important.
In the past, whether a product is genuine was validated based on a label, a warranty, etc., which are attached to a product. Also, whether a person is genuine is validated based on an identification card or a seal, etc. which are held by the person. Furthermore, the entrance and exit procedure is controlled using various keys. With the development of technology, reproduction technology makes progress. Thus, there is an increasing need for recognition means whose reproduction is difficult. To keep up with this trend, a variety of recognition means such as keys having barcode, a smart code, a magnetic card or an IC chip built therein and various technologies using human physical characteristics such as fingerprint, iris and face recognition have been developed.
However, the barcode, the IC chip, etc. are problematic in security since they can be reproduced. A recognition system using a physical characteristic such as fingerprint recognition is difficult to reproduce but has a problem in its use (the number of users, the use time, the use space) because some of the human body is used as a recognition object.
In addition, a consumer purchases a product through various paths, i.e., e-commerce through the Internet, departments, shops, direct transaction between consumers and so on. However, there is no method for determining whether a product purchased by the consumer is genuine. Thus, there was no choice but to determine whether the product is genuine based on information provided by a seller. Meanwhile, an imitation similar to a curio, in particular, imitations of a watch, a handbag, a golf goods, foreign liquors, etc. are in circulation in some countries in the world. Therefore, it causes damage to innocent consumers and becomes problematic in determining whether the product is genuine.
In order to prevent this imitation, conventionally, whether a product is genuine is validated based on a label, a warranty, etc. that are attached to the product. However, with the advancement of technology, reproduction technology makes progress and such recognition means is also reproduced. It thus becomes more difficult to determine whether a product is genuine.
In addition, as a solution for such security authentication and curio validation, there was disclosed U.S. Pat. No. 4,767,205 entitled “a combination for Security Authentication and Security Authentication Method. The US patent discloses that a combination of a size, shape or color of microbead of a micron unit is used for security authentication.
In other words, information on the size, shape and color of the microbead formed randomly is compared with each other and is used for security authentication, curio validation, etc.
For example, it is assumed that an original document is written. An combination is produced at a predetermined location on the original document. First authentication information on the size, shape and color of a microbead constituting the combination is then acquired using a microscope. If whether the document is genuine becomes problematic, the size, shape and color of the microbead constituting the combination on the document are perceived using a microscope and are then compared with the first authentication information, to determine whether the document is genuine.
It can be said that this method is relatively advantageous in preventing counterfeiting as compared with a conventional label or warranty, but still has the following problems.
In other words, in this method, 2D information on a plane about the size, shape and color of the microbead constituting the combination that is generated randomly is perceived by means of the microscope. It is thus possible to counterfeit the 2D information like the conventional barcode or label.
It only needs more elaborate technology upon counterfeiting in that a microbead of micro unit that is invisible to the naked eye is used.
Moreover, in the aforementioned US patent, the size, shape and color of the microbead constituting the combination that is randomly generated are perceived by the microscope and are then compared with the stored first authentication information. It is thus inevitable that the speed of authentication is significantly low.
Furthermore, the US patent has a significant limitation to an authentication place. This is because the US patent does not disclose separate means such as the Internet through which the stored first authentication information can be accessed. In the prior art, authentication is possible only at a place where the first authentication is secured and is validated.