Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Computing
  3. News

Pucker up: ‘Lip password’ verifies your identity through your lip motions

Add as a preferred source on Google

A team of scientists have developed a new biometric authentication method that identifies someone through the motions of their lips.

The “lip motion password,” or lip password, has been designed by Professor Cheung Yiu-ming and researchers at Hong Kong Baptist University. The method involves matching the lip motion associated with saying your password to the user’s lip characteristics.

Recommended Videos

The researchers at the university’s department of computer science claim that lip movement is unique to the individual. It cannot be easily impersonated and an impostor will be denied entry by the system, they said. “The same password spoken by two persons is different and a learning system can distinguish them,” commented Professor Cheung.

Cheung and his team developed a computational learning model that examined the visual features of a person’s lips including shape, texture, and movement.

lip password
Professor Cheung Yiu-ming Hong Kong Baptist University

This biometric authentication method could provide an additional layer of security for access to programs or systems. According to Cheung, it is a better system than voice activation, which can be inhibited by background noise. Further, lip passwords can be used by people with hearing or speech impairments and the method is not susceptible to language barriers, allowing anyone to use it, at least in theory.

In the future, the lip password could be integrated with facial recognition authentication systems for even more robust security and verification, the researchers said.

Biometrics using features like fingerprints have become much more common in recent years but they present a fundamental problem – they can’t be changed. If fingerprint scan data is ever stolen, the user needs to find a new method of authentication. The researchers in Hong Kong believe their new method of lip motions can provide security while allowing the user to change or reset it when they want.

The researchers have already obtained a patent for the method and expect to see it first deployed in financial transaction verification. They added that other use cases include ATM verification, mobile payments, and managing access to private premises.

Jonathan Keane
Jonathan is a freelance technology journalist living in Dublin, Ireland. He's previously written for publications and sites…
Gemini Notebook’s latest update makes it a better study companion
Google is adding voice conversations, lecture recording, interactive quizzes, and short video overviews to its AI-powered notebook.
Gemini Notebook update for students

Google is giving Gemini Notebook, formerly NotebookLM, a major upgrade for students, adding new features designed to help them understand difficult concepts, capture lectures, and turn study materials into interactive learning tools. The update lands alongside a free year of Google's paid AI plan for eligible college students.

Gemini Notebook can now talk you through your notes

Read more
LG 39GX950B review: An ultrawide OLED that gets remarkably close to having it all
LG’s 39-inch 5K2K OLED combines high-end picture quality with seriously fast gaming
Electronics, Screen, Computer Hardware

see at bestbuy

Quick Verdict

Read more
Should we feel bad about deleting an AI? One expert says it’s time to find out
If AI can learn, remember, and make increasingly complex decisions, one expert thinks we should be more careful about how we say goodbye.
an on off toggle

Turning off an AI might sound as simple as hitting a switch, but according to futurist and University of Technology Sydney professor Rocky Scopelliti, that mindset needs to change fast. As first reported by TechXplore, Scopelliti's new book, The Conscious Code, Scopelliti argues that as AI systems get better at reflecting on their own choices, deleting them without a second thought could actually cause harm.

He's not asking us to hand robots legal rights. Instead, he wants us to accept what he calls a duty of good stewardship, basically treating AI responsibly because we're the ones holding the power, not because the AI is demanding it. As he puts it, our design choices can quietly cause damage by wiping out an AI's "learned moral dispositions" without warning.

Read more