IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine - January/February 2024 - 70

Special Section on Security and Privacy-Aware Emerging Computing
criteria to include a broader range of users
and circumstances.
2) Presence-The requirement for a user to visit
any kiosk or facility controlled and supervised
by the CSP should be replaced with a
system capable of providing identity-proofing
service from anywhere.
3) Biometrics-Collection and use of biometrics
should be preferred in a bid to improve confidence
in the remote establishment of identity.
4) Redundancy-Concurrent use of two (or more)
systems for information collection, verification,
and validation should be required to further
reduce thechanceofanadversarial intrusion
or an error.
Practical and Theoretical Contributions
As part of this study, we provide an overview
of the standards and regulations governing RiDP
systems and their adoption by industry/organizations,
including those defined by NIST, ISO, and
the EU. We also highlight factors that hinder the
adoption of RiDP, such as limitations of current
standards and obstacles to achieving higher
assurance levels. In addition, we provide an overview
of threats and vulnerabilities to RiDP systems,
including the use of deepfake technologies.
After discussing the limiting factors hindering
RiDP adoption, we provide recommendations
on how future work can address them. These
recommendations include the use of a multimodal
approach to further strengthen RiDP processes,
enabling higher levels of assurance.
Future Research Directions
Moving forward, we advocate strongly for the
need to develop a new RiDP solution and conduct
real-life testing to evaluate its confidence
level, reliability, and usability. As discussed previously,
the developed RiDP solution should be
lightweight and adhere to the requirements mentioned
above with easy onboarding processes
for different industries (e.g., financial institutes,
government authorities, etc.) so as to make the
entire RiDP process seamless with more precise
verification of users (e.g., applicants) in a remote
setting. In addition, RiDP solutions should also
collect and use any personal data in a privacypreserving
manner so as to fulfil the relevant
legal requirements.
70
Another important aspect to consider is that
deepfake technologies continue to evolve,
becoming ever easier to access and implement
(as highlighted in the section " The ease of generating
Deepfakes " ). Such technologies pose the
greatest threat toward achieving higher levels of
assurance in RiDP, and any future studies must
examine novel ways to detect and deter these
forms of attacks.
It is worth noting that the implementation of
RiDP on consumer electronics may result in
additional resource and security costs. However,
the potential drawbacks should be weighed
against the benefits of enhanced security and
reduced risk of fraudulent activities and unauthorized
access. Therefore, further research is
necessary to understand and measure the cost
versus benefits associated with RiDP implementation
for different use cases.
Finally, examining methods to enhance the
adoption of RiDP by organizations and users
through simplifying and improving user experience
is another critical challenge that needs to
be addressed in the future.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported by the Cyber Security
Cooperative Research Centre Limited,
whose activities are partially funded by the
Australian Government's Cooperative Research
Centres Program.
&REFERENCES
1. ENISA, " eIDAS compliant eID solutions, " 2020.
[Online]. Available: https://bit.ly/3QpEEJL
2. P. A. Grassi et al., " Digital identity guidelines, " NIST
Special Publication 800-63A, 2016, doi: 10.6028/NIST.
SP.800-63a.
3. A. Nanda, S. W. A. Shah, J. Jeong, and R. Doss,
" Supplementary evidence: Towards higher levels of
assurance in remote identity proofing, " 2022. [Online].
Available: https://bit.ly/3cW5Y4F
4. International Organization for Standardization, " ISO/
IEC TS 29003:2018: Information technology-Security
techniques-Identity proofing, " 2018. [Online].
Available: https://www.iso.org/standard/62290.html
5. European Union, " Regulation (EU) no 910/2014, " 2014.
[Online]. Available: https://bit.ly/3TXpQVp
IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine
https://bit.ly/3QpEEJL https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-63a https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-63a https://bit.ly/3cW5Y4F https://www.iso.org/standard/62290.html https://bit.ly/3TXpQVp
IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine - January/February 2024

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine - January/February 2024
