By John Wolfe · CEO, NovaVera · April 2026 · 6 min read
Download the PDFThe Scale
Counterfeit trade hit $467 billion in 2021. By 2030 it could reach $1.79 trillion.
The OECD and EUIPO documented $467 billion in cross-border counterfeit goods in their most recent global survey. Industry analysts project that figure to more than triple by the end of the decade. The technologies built to stop counterfeiting now sit at the center of supply chain, regulatory, and brand strategy decisions.
Sources: OECD/EUIPO Mapping Global Trade in Fakes 2025; Corsearch 2024 projection
The Term
Product authentication is the process of verifying that a physical product is genuine.
It's a yes-or-no verification problem about a specific physical object. Did this come from the legitimate source? Is the material in front of you the material it claims to be?
ISO 12931 frames authentication as the verification of a material good's claim of authenticity. It is the international standard for authentication solutions.
Within that standard, authentication features fall into three families: overt, covert, and forensic. They differ in who can verify them, what tool is needed, and how long verification takes.
Sources: ISO 12931:2012; ISO 22383:2020
Family 01 · Overt
Visible features. The ones you can see.
Authentication elements detectable by human senses without any tool. Anyone can verify them in seconds, with no equipment.
Examples: Holograms · Color-shifting ink · Watermarks · Microprinting · Tamper-evident seals
Strengths
- Anyone can verify without equipment
- Low cost to deploy at scale
- Effective consumer-level deterrent
Limitations
- Visible features tell counterfeiters what to copy
- "Good enough" imitations are easy to produce
- Tend to drift toward marketing element over time
Family 02 · Covert
Hidden features. Visible only with a tool.
Authentication elements hidden from human senses until a specific tool reveals them. Often embedded into the product material or packaging substrate during manufacturing.
Examples: UV / IR inks · Chemical taggants · Embedded fluorophores · Magnetic threads · Molecular markers
Strengths
- Counterfeiters cannot copy what they cannot see
- Can be embedded inside the material itself
- Works as a layered defense with overt features
Limitations
- Requires verification equipment in the field or lab
- Higher initial integration and tooling cost
- Limited consumer-level utility
Family 03 · Forensic
Lab-grade features. Verified only by experts.
The deepest layer. Authentication elements verified only by skilled experts using laboratory equipment. Used to resolve disputes when other layers are in question.
Examples: DNA taggants · Isotope ratios · Spectroscopic signatures · Chemical fingerprints · Microscopic markers
Strengths
- Strongest verifiable evidence, legal-grade
- Definitive resolution of authenticity disputes
- Hardest category for counterfeiters to replicate
Limitations
- Slow: hours to days, not seconds
- Expensive per verification
- Not viable for routine high-volume checks
Sources: ISO 12931:2012; WIPO Magazine, "The Role of Authentication Technologies in Combating Counterfeiting"
In Practice
The strongest systems layer multiple families.
No single category answers every threat. Real-world authentication usually pulls from two or three families at once: overt for consumer-level reassurance, covert for inspector-level verification, forensic for legal disputes.
- Banknotes: Overt + Covert + Forensic
- Pharma packaging: Overt + Covert
- Industrial parts: Covert + Forensic
ISO 12931 establishes that combining multiple authentication elements raises both the cost of attack and the security level of the solution.
Source: ISO 12931:2012, multi-element approach
At a Glance
Three approaches, side by side.
| Overt | Covert | Forensic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Visible to eye | Yes | No | No |
| Tool to verify | None | Handheld reader | Laboratory |
| Time to verify | Seconds | Seconds | Hours to days |
| Verifier | Anyone | Inspector | Lab expert |
| Resistance to copying* | Low | High | Very high |
*Practitioner consensus on relative attack resistance. ISO 22383:2020 establishes the framework, not the ratings.
Sources: ISO 12931:2012; ISO 22383:2020; WIPO Magazine, 2024
Three things to take from this
What this primer tried to make visible.
- Authentication is a yes-or-no question about a specific physical object. Answering it requires a feature in or on the product itself: a marker, a signature, an embedded element that can't be faked at scale.
- Three broad families of solutions exist (overt, covert, forensic). Each has real strengths and real limitations. None is universally best.
- The strongest systems combine multiple families. Banknotes use all three. The right question for a buyer isn't "which technology should I pick." It's "which combination fits this risk."
References
ISO 12931:2012 · ISO 22383:2020 · OECD/EUIPO, Mapping Global Trade in Fakes 2025 · Corsearch, May 2024 · WIPO Magazine, 2024 · Grand View Research, 2025