Novel Optical Trick Creates Ultra-Secure Cash | Hacker News Reader

Novel Optical Trick Creates Ultra-Secure Cash

fastcompany.com

92 pointsmiraj44 comments

Its very cool, it looks like it would have tonnes of use's assuming there isn't a lower tech method of emulating a similar effect.

Counterfeit cash only has to be good enough to trick a human. It is for this reason that I don't think it would be too long before counterfeiters found a cheap low tech method of creating a similar looking effect.

Let's also remember that it's not incredibly hard to trick a human. (One of my favorite videos related to counterfeit currency is Derren Brown paying for things with blank paper http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Vz_YTNLn6w (And if you think he faked it, he's still managed to trick a lot of other people otherwise.))

I wonder how much in total method after method of trying to stay ahead of the Big Money counterfeiters has cost? Mathematical solutions to the problem of forgery have existed for quite a while, I wish there was more a push for those. (And I'm not necessarily talking about bitcoin either, it's just one of many possibilities.) Of course even just going digital for everything would probably solve a lot of problems, and there are math solutions to keeping different types of anonymity as well.

The polymer notes[1] we use in Australia (and also print for several other countries) have been around for about 18 years now and have very low rates of counterfeiting due to the number of security features built in[2].

The notes do cost more to produce, but the extra durability means that they last about 4 times as long (from memory) in circulation, so overall the cost difference is marginal for the government, but is an additional deterrent for counterfeiters.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymer_banknote [2] http://www.rba.gov.au/banknotes/counterfeit/index.html

I fell for a fake Polymer banknote while on holidays in Brazil (the same Ten Reais banknote seen on Wikipedia).

As the top post said, it only needs to fool a human, not be perfect.

I just read an interesting article about Canada borrowing the polymer from the Australia. I didn't realize that until very recently, Canada had a really serious counterfeiting problem.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/cu...

I just received a polymer $100CAD bill the other day, I thought it was pretty bad ass. I had no clue that it was produced in Australia, and that this technology has been in circulation for a couple decades.

I do notice that when I had the when the bill was in my wallet that has a money clip (I hate big wallets), and when sat on, it produced a visible crease that's not as prevalent in the fiber notes along side it. Overall, I do see it as being more durable.

> have very low rates of counterfeiting due to the number of security features built in

Is it the security measures, or does the (relatively) small number of places where one can pass Australian currency result in fewer attempts?

US currency is somewhat familiar in a large number of countries, so there are lots of opportunities to get someone to take counterfeits.

I read the article and they said they could even put watermarks that human can't see, only machines. Shops are already employing UV lights to check currency so I would imagine they would get something that could check for the invisible watermark.

Who cares about "security"? This is an aesthetic goldmine: the ability to emboss passive no-power fluorescence onto any surface or material permanently is huge.

Tattoos, buildings, glassware, bezels, cars, reflectors, furniture... jeez. This is amazing stuff.

It won't be ultra secure if it's cheap to manufacture and used in products ranging from money to even concert tickets.

But very cool none the less. I do hope it gets fitted to the next currencies because an extra obstacle for counterfeiters is always welcome.

Cheap to manufacture usually refers to per unit costs. If a machine costs 10 million dollars and has an output of 100 million units per year, your per unit cost is 10 cents (plus materials), or "pretty cheap."

Only state sponsored counterfeiters would be able to replicate this technology in the next 10 years.

I believe it's the sate sponsored teams that actually get most of the fake money into circulation (in terms of currency value, not units in circulation):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdollar

The UK has a large problem with fake Pound coins, which are made at an artisan level, but all the high value note faking, worldwide, of established currencies, is most likely State Sponsored. Which states produce them remains a mystery, though some think it is the USA/CIA: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2008/01/10/24521/us-counterfeitin...

That link says absolutely nothing about the US or CIA possibly counterfeiting UK pound coins.

But the post you're replying to doesn't claim that UK pound coins are counterfeited by US or CIA, it says that UK coins are counterfeited by "artisans".

(http://www.coinauthentication.co.uk/poundfiles-types.html)

Wikipedia says that nearly 3% of pound coins are counterfeit, and that the Swazi lilangeni is minted from the same planchets, which makes vending machine fraud easy.

Here is the post I am quoting: The UK has a large problem with fake Pound coins.... Which states produce them remains a mystery, though some think it is the USA/CIA

After this quote a link was provided. That link did not mention anything about the USA or CIA producing fake UK pound coins.

Am I missing something? Why are the two topics in the same paragraph if they are not related?

Looks like you missed the bit in the middle:

The UK has a large problem with fake Pound coins,--- which are made at an artisan level,--- but all the high value note faking, worldwide, of established currencies, is most likely State Sponsored.

This was to clarify what I had meant above, talking about volume over value. The UK has a large volume of fake coins in circulation, most likely far far more than the number of fake notes we have circulating. BUT the value of the fake notes in circulation far exceeds that of the coins.

I was trying to make it clear that yes there is a lot of mom and pop fakery going on, but the real high value fakery comes from the highly technical and sophisticated teams (most like state sponsored).

Cereal boxes spring to mind. If its popular, then pretty soon you could buy up the equipment at some a fire sale when some local advertising shop went under.

Why did they say "thousands of years of evolution" instead of millions?

Well, given the earth is only 6,000 years old...

"Never before seen optical trick" makes it sound like the company invented plasmonics. This isn't true. Using patterned structures to affect electromagnetic fields via surface plasmons has been around for quite a while in lower frequency ranges. The recent advances in nano-patterning have allowed for access to optical wavelength light. Plasmonics is a very cool field, and is likely to have many more applications.

For further reading: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=10&q=plasmonics

I can imagine advertisers using this to stamp currency with their logo.

(however it's illegal to tamper with money like that)

I highly doubt it will survive the wear and tear of regular use though - if the microscopic holes become worn and enlarged or filled with dust, the effect will stop working.

I wonder if the information-density could be used to make it extremely fault-tolerant. Even if you had an 80% failure rate due to damaged holes you could still communicate a vast amount of information in the remaining 20% that were unharmed, and just build redundancy into the system.

Oh No! Back to storing programs on punch cards.

full-circle.

> if the microscopic holes become worn and enlarged or filled with dust, the effect will stop working.

From the article:

> [...] which are typically 100-200 nanometers in diameter

200 nanometers is 0.2 microns.

(http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/particle-sizes-d_934.html)

Dust is much too big, but there are some particles which may be small enough to clog the holes.

Bacteria. Viruses. Fluids. Yuck.

Paper being fibre already has numerous holes for all the gunk to build up in.

Don't go putting currency in your mouth.

How large is cocaine powder?

(http://library-resources.cqu.edu.au/JFS/PDF/vol_41/iss_3/JFS...)

> Previous work by Revenue Canada and the U.S. Customs Service indicated that heroin particles from seized samples are rarely larger than 20 microns in diameter, while cocaine particles are often larger than 20 microns, some times reaching 400 microns

I never understood how do those anti-counterfeiting defenses work.

How come anybody can't buy the tech and make it at home? Is it because you can't just get the machines, or maybe because they're expensive?

It's much cheaper to counterfeit old currency that is still in circulation than to invest a lot of money in trying to replicate the latest security features.

Why all the complex names for it? The iridescent color of a butterfly wing has been known as "structural color" for a very long time.

Sounds like they have a better mousetrap. Should be interesting to see whether they build a successful business out of it.

Reflective clothing?

It will start with currency and such, followed by clothing (hey, look at me!), then nails, then full body "tattoos". Heck, a couple of decades from now we'll put the city of Panem (from the Hunger Games) to shame. We'll all look like a bunch of human butterflies.

hey, look at me!

For safety, not for fashion. Hopefully.

How about fingernails?

Id rather see a currency that cant be stolen by governments who print the currency like mad causing hyperinflation. A hyperinflation protected currency where it takes millions of computer-years of time to print more cash.

At my house, we have a "no computer programmers talking about economics".

One of the biggest problems of the Eurozone is the inability for governments to inflate their money-supply. Also you just described bitcoin.

I've seen some reasonable responses over here. Also lots of uninformed or misinformed stuff, sure, but I'd rather not limit discussion of economics, law, etc.. just to the professionals.

Also, the more I learn about economics (I'm halfway through an MBA program), the less I believe economics should be left to the economists - I do understand that I have only a patina of knowledge, and that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing :).

I think the key issue is that there's something about computer programmers that makes them think they already understand economics. I'm not sure what. Maybe that it seems like it should be self evident because "it's just numbers" or something.

And yet, some of the facile comments you read and hear and I will cut the fingers off the next person who tells me we should go back to the gold standard, because at least gold has a value...

No, your problem is that you governments borrowed too much to spend on unsustainable social programs, and reality is finally rearing its ugly head. Printing money will certainly paper over this problem, while screwing over savers and others who were prudent enough not to blow up the bubble.

Well, that pretty much describes bitcoin, plus it has the forgery problem solved.

I introduce anti-matter backed currency! Not only does anti-matter backed currency make it (currently) highly secure from hyperinflation, but it actually takes energy to keep it from destroying itself giving it an intrinsic value (well, as much as anything can have one). Sure, there will be occasional bouts of deflation during say, rolling blackouts, but that's a small price to pay for a security that can't be "stolen" by governments!

If you're interested, please send me all your "old" currency in a self-addressed stamped envelope and in return, I will send you one anti-proton.

Disclaimer: anti-proton may be destroyed immediately

Reply on news.ycombinator.com