Which of the following is generally indicative of a replay attack when dealing with biometric authentication?

A False Acceptance Rate greater than 1 in 100,000 indicates the system's sensitivity or threshold is too permissive, which is a configuration or tuning issue rather than evidence of a replay attack.

A False Rejection Rate greater than 5 in 100 indicates the system is overly strict and is rejecting legitimate users too frequently, which reflects a threshold or template quality problem, not a replay attack.

Inadequately specified templates refer to poor enrollment quality or insufficient biometric data captured during setup, which is a provisioning or data quality issue rather than an indicator of a replay attack.

Legitimate biometric readings always contain minor variability due to environmental factors, sensor noise, and physiological changes, so an exact match between a stored template and a submitted sample strongly suggests a replayed or cloned digital copy of the original biometric data rather than a genuine live reading. This is a hallmark indicator of a replay attack, where an attacker captures and retransmits a previously authenticated biometric signal. Real biometric systems are designed to accept close matches within a tolerance threshold, not perfect duplicates.