19 ms·

Face ID, Touch ID, No ID, PINs and Pragmatic Security

• DamonHD 9y ago
  Good, balanced, pragmatic discussion.
• Crontab 9y ago
  All I know is that I will avoid any system that can work if I am not conscious.
  • janfoeh 9y ago
    So you would prefer FaceID over TouchID?
    • wrboyce 9y ago
      Yeah, FaceID seems like an improvement in this aspect - unless OP is locking his fingerprints in a safe before going to bed.
    • Crontab 9y ago
      I don't trust or use either one.
  • msravi 9y ago
    According to the article, the phone won't unlock if you aren't attentive, i.e., looking at the phone with your eyes open with tiny imperceptible eye movements.
    • kowdermeister 9y ago
      It will be called the Tom & Jerry hack :) https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BeYn6TfIIAESHte.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BeYn6TfIIAESHte.jpg
    • rothron 9y ago
      Not looking forward to the video services that demand that you pay attention to ads before they let you view their content, now that they have the ability to check.
      • ubernostrum 9y ago
        Do they actually have that ability, though? There's a big difference between "the authentication mechanism has access to this API when you're authenticating" and "everything always has access to this API at all times". I haven't seen any indication that this will be generally available on-demand to applications, and Apple's track record on this stuff isn't terrible (largely because Apple isn't existentially dependent on advertising like some other vendors of mobile tech).
        • batuhanicoz 9y ago
          The camera and the sensors can be available but I'm certain the auth mechanism itself won't be accessible. AFAIK they have a dedicated chip for this like Touch ID and what software can is limited.
      • batuhanicoz 9y ago
        I don't think Apple would allow that in their platform but could certainly give ad tech firms ideas.
      • yoz-y 9y ago
        Black Mirror made a shot at this. Ads which give you a fine if you don't watch them.
      • arethuza 9y ago
        Imagine if this feature gets added to PowerPoint, or Webex/Skype?
• dredmorbius 9y ago
  Near-field worn devices. http://nfcring.com http://nfcring.com is an example of what I have in mind. What I'd like to see is this tied into an identity system, such that the ring (or other very-hard-to-misplace, but replaceable and discardable) token is not itself an identity, but rather an access token to an identity store which can present any given identity to any given system. That might be a consistent identity across multiple sessions or unique identities on each session. The identity might be tied to some central certifying agency (e.g., a motor vehicles department or national pensions fund), or not. There are several elements of this which I'd like to see developed further, including how keys might be reconstructed or recovered using a quorum system of trusted sources (divide your key into pieces, share those amongst friends, family, or some local authority, such that key loss need not equal data loss), and possibly via law enforcement. I'm also looking at the possibility of a public ledger system which might allow for both workfactor requirements and public disclosure of keys being revealed. This may be a viable application of crypto, though I'm not entirely sure of this. (The feature might also be optional -- you could take the risk of key loss, or allow for recovery. But the present situation with PKI of losing access to all previously-encrypted data in the event of key loss would be mitigated.) There's also the requirement for devices to have support for near-field readers. I'm told this is alreadly largely a reality, though my reading of specs for various mobile devices suggests otherwise. The biggest challenges through all of this are not the technology itself, but the adoption, requirement, and enforcement of standards, including availability of tokens at low or no end-user price. Trust of the information ecosystem overall might be a suitable incentive for this to happen.
  • mrmondo 9y ago
    Slightly ironically the TLS is broken on that nfcring website.
    • dredmorbius 9y ago
      Yeah. I ... had to edit the URL, as I'm used to specifying https rather than http these days. There are a few other flags raised about that particular implementation, though the concept itself is the key point. The idea of a signet ring to authenticate, sign, access, pay, claim, and/or decrypt seems useful.
• jlebrech 9y ago
  what about FaceID + pin? that would mean someone would have to know your pin as well as have access to your face. you also wouldn't have to look so paranoid while entering the pin. and pin by itself would be of little value.
  • joosters 9y ago
    For phone-based biometrics, the PIN has always been a backup for the fingerprint/face recognition, because these things aren't 100% reliable. Not even considering any security aspects here, just practicalities, like your hands are dirty or your face isn't being recognised (perhaps you've got bandages on your face or whatever). Having the PIN as a replacement is a good thing in these cases, otherwise you could be locked out of your device when you actually want to use it. For 'extreme' security situations, you might as well just have a long secret PIN and no biometrics.
    • jlebrech 9y ago
      FaceID + shortpin = unlock longpin = unlock
      • leadingthenet 9y ago
        Yes! I'd love this.
        • liberte82 9y ago
          Too complicated
          • jlebrech 9y ago
            it can just be a setting you either enable or don't
  • vlozko 9y ago
    The author started off saying how less than 1% of Dropbox users use two-factor authentication. What good is such a scheme when nobody is going to use it?
• rcarmo 9y ago
  For me it's not so much the paranoia or the degree of security (which is an arguable point in itself) but the commodity of it. Touch ID lets me unlock my devices without having to re-position my upper body or move them in (practically) any way, and Face ID feels awkward (I'm typing this on the device that is likely an exception to that - a Microsoft Surface Pro - and Windows Hello's face recognition works beautifully, but I am _always_ facing it when I need it to unlock, so...)
  • madeofpalk 9y ago
    > Face ID feels awkward Have you used it?
    • alexbeloi 9y ago
      There's some app that uses the face++ api to do login using facial recognition, I can't recall the name of it off the top of my head but maybe you can find it with that info. edit: how could I forget, it's the little known app called Alipay.\s
    • joering2 9y ago
      But wht was wrong with TouchID ? Were there any examples of it being weak security. What will be after Touch ID? Will Apple continue progress and built in PinchID - a tiny needle that sting you to test if you are you based on your blood/DNA? This is a serious question. Because of there was noting wrong with Touch then why is it removed from new phone and replaced with Face ID. Im also concerned about the data Apple will collect. I assume information about your face have to be very detailed so that this FaceID is secure. Is it really that of a push to see article in 6 months: FBI got a copy of whole Apple FaceDatabase and was able to identify and find a very dengerous criminal.
      • madmoose 9y ago
        TouchID was removed because it took up space on the front of the phone and Apple wanted the screen to be bigger. There's no deeper reason than that. > Will Apple continue progress and built in PinchID - a tiny needle that sting you to test if you are you based on your blood/DNA? I struggle to believe you when you say that's a serious question... > Im also concerned about the data Apple will collect. The FaceID data will be stored in the secure enclave locally on your phone, just like TouchID data was. Apple will not collect it.
• comstock 9y ago
  Nice article. However: > It's alarming not just because the number is so low, but because Dropbox holds such valuable information for so many people. I'd suggest that Dropbox users somewhat self select for those not as concerned about security as others. And more concerned about availability. Dropbox does not encrypt your data server side (or at the very least, can easily decrypt it). And they have proponents of warrantless surveillance on their board: http://www.drop-dropbox.com http://www.drop-dropbox.com
  • dx034 9y ago
    > I'd suggest that Dropbox users somewhat self select for those not as concerned about security as others. And more concerned about availability. I would rather say that Dropbox is being used by many people without tech knowledge. And while they might be concerned about security, they often just don't know how improtant 2 factor authentication is. At least that's what I can see for some friends & family.
    • y4mi 9y ago
      eeh, since when does u2a protect against back-end breaches? thats just a security layer against phishing or password leaks... don't get me wrong, i'd advice everyone to use it for anything remotely critical, because its pretty easy to setup and live with, but it really doesnt help against state actors or hackers that compromised the data servers.
      • hellofunk 9y ago
        > since when does u2a protect against back-end breaches? Because if someone steals your DB password, they still won't be able to login to your account. Maybe they won't have to, if they also stole your data and found a way to decrypt it, but since those are different things, it is plausible that there could be a leak of login information without a leak of data, in which case your two-factor authentication would keep the attackers out of your data.
      • ProblemFactory 9y ago
• durzagott 9y ago
  So, with Face ID, can you prevent someone trying to compel you to unlock your device by simply closing your eyes or looking away?
  • huxley 9y ago
    That was the way it was described in the Keynote
    • have_faith 9y ago
      How do you know when to open your eyes again?
      • fletom 9y ago
        You can open your eyes but not look at the phone.
  • tbassetto 9y ago
    Yes. If you have time to do it, also press 5 times on the on/off button, it disables Face ID and forces entering the PIN. It's an iOS 11 feature, I just tried on my iPhone 6 and it disabled Touch ID.
• koliber 9y ago
  There is an opposite use case which will make me consider getting an iPhone X for a long time. Every so often, I leave my phone at home and I need my wife to get some info from it. Or my phone runs out of batteries and my wife's phone is there, and I use to to make a phone call. With Face ID, these possibilities go away.
  • Angostura 9y ago
    I presume you can enroll multiple faces, no?
    • uptown 9y ago
      FaceID currently only supports one face. Source: https://twitter.com/reneritchie/status/907724254652784640 https://twitter.com/reneritchie/status/907724254652784640
      • 2close4comfort 9y ago
        But waht if my face is not supported?
  • raesene6 9y ago
    If it's implemented in the same way as TouchID, you can always fall back to PIN.
    • koliber 9y ago
      Oh. Thank you for pointing this out. It was not clear to me that this is the case. From a quick look at their initial marketing material, it seemed like the way to unlock it was to wave it in front of your face.
  • elkabong 9y ago
    Your wife could also know your passcode and vice versa, if this is such a necessity
  • 9y ago
• ekzy 9y ago
  It would be interesting if we could specify a particular face pattern to unlock the phone. Imagine you set up your phone to open only if you smile, now if someone picks up your phone and try to unlock it by pointing it at your face, not smiling would be easier than closing your eyes or looking away. Not even mentioning the health benefit of just smiling :)
  • amelius 9y ago
    Isn't this already possible by smiling while training your phone?
    • ekzy 9y ago
      I am not sure but I think that if you smiled while training your phone you'd still be able to unlock it with any other facial expression
  • enobrev 9y ago
    I would look forward to the headline where the police had to tickle the accused in order to get access to his phone against his will.
  • teniutza 9y ago
    It would be awkward to smile/pose before/after a funeral, just because I need to call my mum or check my email... That being said, I do think that there could be a legitimate use case here. One could set up a particular "emotion" (a face pattern) associated with someone forcing them to unlock a phone using their face. I mean, if someone pulls a gun or a knife on me, I'll probably just do as they say and look at the phone, rather than risk an additional hole in my body. But unlocking a phone and sending a distress call is something I could live with.
    • saluki 9y ago
      y, if someone has a knife or gun I would just give them what they want and worry about a distress call after you're safe instead of getting fancy trying to activate an 'I'm being mugged' feature. I think that could be a nice feature but would add stress to the situation when you should just be focussed on staying alive trying to remember how to do that special thing or enter an alternate code.
• fortythirteen 9y ago
  For me it's a simple question of cost vs. reward: do I care enough about the security of whatever data is stored with a company, that I'm willing to give the company personal information, when their terms of service almost assuredly give them complete license with it? This, of course, starts with the question: do I even want to put this in the cloud to begin with? Edit: I was talking about two factor auth.
  • kibwen 9y ago
    From the OP: "the data is stored in the iPhone's secure enclave and never leaves the device". It appears that this has nothing at all to do with the cloud. And if you don't trust Apple's word here, then you also have no reason to trust that they (or any other handset maker) haven't programmed the camera to surreptitiously take and transmit photos at all times.
    • fortythirteen 9y ago
      I'm talking about two factor auth.
• jasonmaydie 9y ago
  you can change your pin. you can't change your face.
  • overcast 9y ago
    That's not true at all.
    • aethertron 9y ago
      So you can change your face, and you can't change your PIN?
      • overcast 9y ago
        Surprisingly true with most end users I deal with.
  • kibwen 9y ago
    Which is why it's nice that none of the biometric auths can be used without also having a PIN for backup auth. And also why it's nice that you can disable biometrics entirely.
    • jasonmaydie 9y ago
      The comment was aimed at the Snowden example. If Snowden thought his pin was compromised he could always change his pin, but once his face is compromised what does he doe?
      • lukeholder 9y ago
        not use faceID?
      • fisherjeff 9y ago
        This entire article was explicitly written to address this line of thinking, and IMO does so very well.
• tonyztan 9y ago
  Given that the authentication methods are "differently secure," wouldn't it be good if we were offered the option to combine them and require both for unlock? I would love to use Face ID + PIN or Touch ID + PIN for better security.
  • nobodyorother 9y ago
    I've been wondering that too. If possible, it'd be nice to combine username, second-factor, and password, as they all perform different functions that people often ambiguate: - Your username is who you think you are. - Your second-factor (faceprint, thumbprint, keyfob) is who you claim to be. - Your password is your proof.
    • rothbardrand 9y ago
      Setting up a new device does require three factors: Username, Password and a 2FA on an existing device. But even with a 4 digit PIN most people didn't have PINs set up on their devices, so increasing friction will not result in more security. If you want max security now, you can simply turn off TouchID or FaceID and us a very long alpha numeric password.
    • ballenf 9y ago
      Large public systems could do away with usernames if they assigned random, unique passwords to users out of a large keyspace. Usernames allow the keyspace to be smaller and the keys have less entropy making user chosen keys possible. But then we add key minimum entropy requirements (sometimes using only length as a proxy) in order to combat the freedom given. Would be interesting to see whether username-less public systems suffer fewer intrusions. Some users would record their passwords in unsafe places, but they couldn't reuse a password eliminating password stuffing as an attack surface. Of course, if you allow password resets you'd still have a kind of "backup" username presuming a person's email address could be used for the reset. But that wouldn't significantly weaken the security, arguably.
  • nxsynonym 9y ago
    I want this, and also the ability to secure different areas of my phone. I want to be able to set touch or PINs for certain apps, so that I can have multi level security. Why is there so much emphasis on one master password/touch ID/face ID instead of having multiple security checks?
• saluki 9y ago
  Stolen iPhones should be worthless. Apple need to create a system where stolen phones can be reported to them, Apple can then contact the owner/verify they are stolen. And then add them to a stolen list and disable calling/apps on those phones. And display an overlay on the screen THIS PHONE IS STOLEN. Every iphone would come with an validate phone feature that is accessible even when locked that can authenticate the iPhone for anyone thinking of buying it. The potential buyer can check if the iPhone is stolen by using the feature that is allowed to connect to the internet and validate the phone. They need to make it where stolen iPhones are worthless so when you are getting mugged criminals won't even want it. Obviously have an option setup where you can transfer ownership of your phone. Maybe with a 7 day waiting period.
  • willstrafach 9y ago
    Find My iPhone + iCloud is what you're describing. Even a DFU restore of the device won't help a thief, as the activation process will simply ask for your iCloud login and will display a "Message From Owner" that you can set at icloud.com indicating the device was stolen, making it much harder for someone to purchase and claim ignorance about the origins.
    • mulletbum 9y ago
      Can confirm. We ran into this problem in my company as we had contractors setup phones and turn on Find my iPhone. We ended having to do some not so great things to make it so we could use the devices again.
      • redler 9y ago
        What not-so-great things?
    • saluki 9y ago
      y, that's true but I feel like Apple could do more so criminals don't even want to take iPhones, Apple could put things in place where they aren't worth anything on the secondary market. Basically unusable and could lead the cops to your house. This way if you're on the subway you can have your phone out without worrying about getting robbed. It your house gets robbed they would leave your phones because they can't be sold or reused.
• symlinkk 9y ago
  This article doesn't really say much of anything. Troy pretty much just summarized a few slides from the Apple event and then ended the article saying he was going to buy an iPhone X and is interested to see how Face ID turns out. I really gained nothing from reading this.
  • MBCook 9y ago
    The point of the article is that many people are complaining about FaceID's security in abstract. The alternatives, like the relatively common 'no password' or '123456 pin' are much LESS secure than FaceID. The other arguments people are making tend to be very fanciful scenarios that don't apply to normal people (state actors, high quality makeup shops with a perfect face mold of your face, etc). It may not be perfect but like TouchID it's probably way better than the alternative.
• mtgx 9y ago
  1 in 1 million FAR (false acceptance rate) vs 1 in 50,000 is pretty misleading (as is Apple tradition). Do you think someone trying to hack into your phone would shoot 1 million random pictures/3D profiles made from Facebook pictures at your phone, or do you think it's far more likely they will already start with your profile made from online pictures? That will likely make the success rate even higher than with fingerprints, as it's significantly easier to get someone's photos than it is to get their fingerprints. > Laughs were had, jokes were made but the underlying message was that Face ID isn't foolproof. Just like Touch ID. And PINs. No, not "just like". There is a huge difference between most fingerprint authentication mechanisms and most face unlock mechanisms (at least so far). Most of them could be tricked with a 2D picture - including Samsung's latest. It's very annoying to see such a statement from someone like Troy Hunt. Plus, I have a hunch he'll be eating many of the words he wrote in a few weeks when Face ID will prove much easier to hack than Apple made everyone believe it will be.
  • MBCook 9y ago
    Do you have a better metric? The author suggested it wasn't the best way to measure it but I'm not sure what would be better. "Most face unlock systems" is the point of Face ID. It's now most systems. It's supposed to fix those weaknesses. (We'll find out for sure when it's in people's hands)
  • admiralpumpkin 9y ago
    Per Apple Face ID doesn't work with photos; TBD in real world.
    • macintux 9y ago
      If they created photorealistic masks to defeat the 3D mapping and those didn't work, I feel pretty confident in saying that photos won't work.
      • MBCook 9y ago
        I think it would be really cool if it turned out that it could tell the difference between some pairs of identical twins due to seemingly imperceptible differences.
• DrNuke 9y ago
  The complete business model is taking the p*ss imho. I am seeing more than a number of people reverting to simple €20 nokias for basic telephone + sms usage on top of a gadget / secondary device for consumption or mobile business.
  • mikeash 9y ago
    Apple sold over 200 million iPhones last year, and they make up a relatively small proportion of the overall smartphone market. I don't think there are very many people like you describe.
• dweekly 9y ago
  Would be interesting to enable voice authentication contemporaneous with face scanning to make sure the lipreading matched the utterance matches the voiceprint matches the expected face. Bonus points that a vocal channel could be used to detect duress (especially if accompanied by, say, raised eyebrows) and either require further authentication (passphrase entry) or a "false unlock" to reveal only a nearly factory fresh app and data underlying. Could also potentially send a notification to friends that your phone had just been unlocked under duress. Bonus points for in parallel hard-scrubbing the underlying true data while displaying the false boring phone interface.
• ramgp 9y ago
  What if users were able to disable FaceID by configuring blinking x times or by having their eyes closed for a certain time period? Maybe requiring FaceID + a different PIN after recognizing that locking over the lock.
• sailfast 9y ago
  This is a really well-written, considered view of the trade-offs for using different options for security. I learned a lot from reading, and the plain language discussion of the topic allows most any reader to better understand the trade-offs present for each option. Much appreciated to the original author - it takes a good deal of time and effort to write something that lucid. Thanks.
• hughw 9y ago
  Free "rein".
• sgarg 9y ago
  I really liked this write-up because it focused on the practicality of the various security mechanisms. Most articles I see usually have a blanket statement like "All biometric security mechanisms are bad!". I think this article does a good job comparing the various logins and describing the pros and cons for different people. Specifically, I appreciate the author calling out when people bring up the "What if" edge-cases, where the correct response is you likely have much bigger problems at that point than the security level of your phone.
  • rothbardrand 9y ago
    Specifically, getting more people to have better security on their devices is a very difficult User Experience problem, and Apple's pretty good at solving these kinds of problems. TouchID moved the ball forward quite a bit, and FaceID will probably go even further. Obviously neither provide ultimate security, but Apple is in a strategic advantage since they make the hardware and software to make the barn walls and roof super secure, but it does nothing if the front door is left open.
    • mikeash 9y ago
      Before TouchID, I set my passcode to 0000 with a four-hour window where I didn't have to reenter it. I only had one set at all because Find My Friends refused to keep me logged in unless I had a passcode set. With TouchID, I have a complex passcode that I have to enter a couple times a week. It's less secure than some hypothetical setup where I have a complex passcode I have to enter every time I unlock the phone, but it's far more secure than what I was actually doing before.
      • phire 9y ago
        My android phone forces me to re-enter my passcode every 24 hours. I think that strikes a nice security median. If someone does get procession of my phone, I only need to stall for less than 24 hours. The rest of the time, the fingerprint scanner works near perfectly. It's actually faster to use the fingerprint scanner than the standard slide to unlock, which is all I ever had setup on my previous phones.
• smelterdemon 9y ago
  Re: the pushback the author got on Twitter; I believe in skepticism towards corporations and marketing claims, but the level of cynicism online towards any new tech idea or product seems a bit out of hand. There's a certain trend, on Twitter especially, of people racing to prove they're either more woke or smarter than the teams of people behind things that are yet to even be released. I mean a "wait and see" attitude wrt the actual effectiveness is good, but I don't get why we need to concoct extreme hypotheticals here suggesting Apple is somehow irresponsible for adding an optional feature.
  • eric_h 9y ago
    > There's a certain trend, on Twitter especially, of people racing to prove they're either more woke or smarter than the teams of people behind things that are yet to even be released. This has been a trend of a vocal minority on the internet for as long as I've been connected to it. Remember "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame"?
    • Razengan 9y ago
      > Remember "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame"? I hate linking to that site but this will always be golden: Apple's New Thing (a post from 2001) [1] [1] https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/apples-new-thing-ipod.500/ https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/apples-new-thing-ipod.5...
  • irq-1 9y ago
    "attention awareness" is Apples own description. How long before it's turned against the user to confirm "Advertisement Awareness" or EULA Awareness, etc..?
    • nemothekid 9y ago
      >Advertisement Awareness Fortunately Sony already has a patent for this exact scenario. Maybe that will deter Apple from building such a feature (lol). http://fortune.com/2013/04/30/sony-patent-is-hilarious-terrifying/ http://fortune.com/2013/04/30/sony-patent-is-hilarious-terri...
• consto 9y ago
  Honestly, the only downside I can see vs. TouchID is that you can in theory point the phone at the person and unlock it. However this is balanced out by not working while unconcious. PINs as discused are not directly comparable.
  • liberte82 9y ago
    How does it not work while unconscious? Eyes need to be open?
    • vlozko 9y ago
      That and looking at the device.
• emilfihlman 9y ago
  The only secure thing is a thing that only you know and only you can verify even if you are freely observed. That is, shared secrets between you and your trusted device (meaning passwords) are the singular thing that provide authentication securely. Your password cannot be extracted from your head (yet). That being said, if your risks are mundane then the benefits of biometric authentication far outweigh constant password input, not to mention that constantly entering your password exposes you to other side-channel attacks. Biometrics for simple access, passwords for changes, modifies and access to sensitive information.
  • arrrg 9y ago
    I know several techniques that would be highly efficient in extracting my password from my head. Some don’t even require physical access. (This is a cryptic way of saying that credible threats of violence or actual violence would compel me pretty quickly to tell my PIN.)
  • reubenswartz 9y ago
    The ease and quality of video surveillance from cell phones makes me think passwords are not that secure if other people or devices can observe you entering them.
  • liberte82 9y ago
    I wonder if you could hack a person's password from their mind by forcing them to go through the alphabet and monitoring their heart rate / brain activity for each letter of their password. There must be a way to detect based on their reaction when you're on the right character, like a lie detector. I mean, I guess at that point you could just torture it out of them, but I wonder if this could work as a method that wouldn't count as torture.
    • graphitezepp 9y ago
      I severely doubt that anything like that is feasible. Lie detectors don't really work so well too, afaik.
  • 9y ago
• apeace 9y ago
  > ...when you do use the biometric options we're about to get into, you're still going to need [a pin] on your phone anyway. For example, every time you hard-reboot an iPhone with Touch ID you need to enter the PIN This is what has been missing from every discussion of this issue that I've seen so far. The face scan isn't "insecure" even if you're worried about border searches. Just turn off your phone when you get in the security line! Pin will be required on start. Pin is also required when plugging into a new computer. The rest of the time when you're going about your daily life, and are not worried about a government agent spoofing your face or pointing the phone at your face, you can use this nice feature. Most people will be _less_ secure without it. They don't want to punch a pin every time they want to tap their phone to pay for coffee. So without the face scan feature, they will opt for no security at all. The reboot/plug-in pin requirements change the discussion quite a bit, but are usually ignored, seemingly so bloggers can state the obvious "but someone can spoof your face!"
  • n42 9y ago
    On top of this, iOS 11 introduced an emergency mode that is enabled by tapping the standby button five times rapidly. It is easy to do discretely in your pocket, and it locks your phone by requiring your passcode to be entered again.
    • joombaga 9y ago
      You can achieve the same effect on some Android devices by exploiting the password lock from scanning the wrong finger repeatedly.
      • irq-1 9y ago
        If a judge issues a warrant allowing the police to compel the use of biometrics, can a person use the wrong finger? Courts can't compel someone enter their PIN. So can a court compel not only biometric "use" but the correct biometric? My Android forces PIN entry after 5 wrong fingerprints.
        • 9y ago
• alistairSH 9y ago
  It appears that FaceId only supports a single face (unlike TouchId, which supports multiple fingers). Maybe this use case isn't common, but my wife frequently needs access to my phone. Usually while driving, to change GPS routing, or playlist, or respond to SMS. With TouchId, she can do so without my PIN. With FaceId, she needs my PIN. This strikes me as both less secure and quite annoying. Now, I have to repeat my PIN out loud while she types it into the device. Or, force her to memorize it (in addition to her own PIN, and I have to remember hers for the reverse situation).
• irq-1 9y ago
  > a thread emerged about abusive spouses. Now if I'm honest, I didn't see that angle coming and it made me curious - what is the angle? I mean how does Face ID pose a greater threat to victims of domestic violence than the previous auth models? If someone has the PIN and the phone, they can get in without the person (without their biometrics.) Fingerprints and Face recognition increase the chances that an abusive spouse needs the other person every time they access the phone. Parents who have their childrens passwords are in the same situation -- they can't snoop on their kids biometrically secured phone (like reading a kids diary in the old days.) They have to have the kids open the phone, which means the kids know that it's happening.
  • irrational 9y ago
    I'm not sure, but I know with my spouse and I, we always put each others Biometrics into each other's devices (I add her fingerprints to my phone and vice versa), share a lastpass account so we know each other's passwords, add our email accounts to each other's devices so we can always look at each others email, etc. If you are married to someone and don't trust them enough to do the same I have to question the foundation the marriage is built on. As for kids, we just don't allow them to have a phone or other device until they are old enough to buy it with their own money, which so far has never happened until they are nearly 18 and getting ready to leave for college anyway.
    • SirZimzim 9y ago
      What the hell
      • cjbillington 9y ago
        I don't think it's completely insane, but I think the parent comment overestimates the proportion of marriages that have that kind of trust. If people didn't get married without 100% trust then most people wouldn't be married, and evidence is that people prefer imperfect relationships to loneliness. It's also useful to have a norm against doing these things even if you have 100% trust, because it's probably the case that people are too readily fooled (by themselves or a manipulative partner) into thinking they have 100 % trust when they actually don't. So having a norm against sharing everything protects the people who need it, even if you're not among those people.
• iamcasen 9y ago
  What I want to know is what face data is shared with 3rd parties like snapchat. That seems like the bigger threat, and no one is really discussing that.
  • colejohnson66 9y ago
    Unless Apple provides only an API to interact with the model, not actually use it. Which, considering it’s Apple, I’m sure they did.
  • cakedoggie 9y ago
    If it is like touch id, then nothing at all.
• graphememes 9y ago
  Repeat after me. iPhone X is less secure than the iPhone 8. Why? iPhone X: Chances of someone unlocking while you are asleep is 1 in 1 iPhone 8: Chances of someone unlocking while you are asleep is 1 in 200,000 I certainly prefer the latter odds.
  • overcyn 9y ago
    Your eyes need to be open for it to unlock. Also someone can't touch your fingertips when you are asleep?
    • graphememes 9y ago
      Some people sleep with their eyes open.