Examining Authenticity: An Initial Exploration of the Suitability of Handwritten Electronic Signatures

• Published in: Forensic science international Vol. 275; pp. 144 - 154
• Main Authors: Heckeroth, J., Boywitt, C.D.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Ireland Elsevier B.V 01.06.2017; Elsevier Limited
• Subjects: Attitude (inclination); Authenticity; Case reports; Circular dichroism; Complexity; Computer applications; Computer programs; Computer simulation; computer software; Data processing; Data sampling; Design; Differentiation; Digital computers; Digital signatures; Digitally acquired signature; Digitally captured signature; Documents; Electronic signature; Experimental design; Experiments; Forensic engineering; Forensic science; Forensic sciences; Forging; Handwriting; Independent variables; Indicators; Information dissemination; Integrity; Legibility; Motor task performance; Nervous system; Pens; precision; qualitative analysis; Quality; Questioned document examination; Recording; Representations; Research methodology; Research methods; Sampling; Software; Specifications; Statistical analysis; Stroke; Temporal variations; Electronic signature; Handwriting; Questioned document examination; Digitally captured signature; Digitally acquired signature
• ISSN: 0379-0738; 1872-6283; 1872-6283
• DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2017.02.019

•Electronic signatures’ suitability for forensic examination is evaluated.•Professional forensic handwriting examiners served as subjects.•No general differences were found between electronic and paper–pen-signatures. Considering the increasing relevance of handwritten electronically captured signatures, we evaluated the ability of forensic handwriting examiners (FHEs) to distinguish between authentic and simulated electronic signatures. Sixty-six professional FHEs examined the authenticity of electronic signatures captured with software by signotec on a smartphone Galaxy Note 4 by Samsung and signatures made with a ballpoint pen on paper (conventional signatures). In addition, we experimentally varied the name (“J. König” vs. “A. Zaiser”) and the status (authentic vs. simulated) of the signatures in question. FHEs’ conclusions about the authenticity did not show a statistically significant general difference between electronic and conventional signatures. Furthermore, no significant discrepancies between electronic and conventional signatures were found with regard to other important aspects of the authenticity examination such as questioned signatures’ graphic information content, the suitability of the provided sample signatures, the necessity of further examinations and the levels of difficulty of the cases under examination. Thus, this study did not reveal any indications that electronic signatures captured with software by signotec on a Galaxy Note 4 are less well suited than conventional signatures for the examination of authenticity, precluding potential technical problems concerning the integrity of electronic signatures.