4 ms·
Face unlock will always be for convenience, not real security. To me it's like a front door lock. It's there to dissuade people. If someone is adamant enough t
by cooljacob204 7y ago
Face unlock will always be for convenience, not real security.
To me it's like a front door lock. It's there to dissuade people. If someone is adamant enough they will get in.
- ryanmcbride 7y agoTotally agree but moving the dot a little further down the line towards security is never a bad thing. Perfect shouldn't be the enemy of the good, etc etc.
- annexrichmond 7y agoFace Unlock is indeed for convenience, but that doesn't mean it can't be used as a secure method of authentication. So when it is implemented as such, it should be as secure as possible. Apple claims its Touch ID is 5x more secure than a 4 digit passcode[1], based the probability of two fingerprints being the same. They claim that its Face ID is 20x more secure than Touch ID[2], or 1 in 1,000,000, which is similar to the probability of guessing a 6 digit password. In my opinion, part of a secure implementation is requiring that the user is aware and looking at the device. So the fact that Pixel doesn't take this into account is a huge security flaw. [1] https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204587 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204587 [2] https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208108 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208108