3 ms·
I think the future defense against this sort of thing is more situational awareness on the part of the phone. You won't just have to fool the biometrics, you'll
by voidmain 8y ago
I think the future defense against this sort of thing is more situational awareness on the part of the phone. You won't just have to fool the biometrics, you'll have to do so without making the phone suspicious at any point. My guess is that phones already have enough sensory data to pretty reliably distinguish everyday usage from being stolen or confiscated, and it's "just" a matter of fitting a model. Nor does the phone have to ignore what happens to it after it's unlocked.
No one tries this sort of thing on people or animals, and it's because they don't shut their perceptions off at all times except for a half second when they are authenticating someone.
- dogma1138 8y agoI wonder when the app that wipes your phone if the GPS shows it to be at a police station or an evidence lockup will come out and what are the repercussions of having such an app will be.
- s73v3r_ 8y agoThere was the guy who sold the "secure" phone (it was targeted at drug dealers and cartel members). He would remote wipe them if they were in police custody. He's now going to jail. Courts take an extremely dim view of the willful destruction of evidence.
- dogma1138 8y agoThat’s a bit different if he actively wipped them once he knew they were in police custody that is tampering with evidence. However a self destruct mechanism that is either on a rolling timer or event driven for which you don’t need to take an action to initiate it but must take an action to stop it could be a legal loophole but it sure won’t look good in court.