4 ms·

Kinda surprised biometrics are recommended. I’ve always thought passcodes were more secure - particularly as the data is not easily accessible by interrogators

Kinda surprised biometrics are recommended. I’ve always thought passcodes were more secure - particularly as the data is not easily accessible by interrogators for example.

WrtCdEvrydy 5y ago
Biometrics are recommended if the data is not classified. Remember this is for people working on sensitive information. This is what the NSA's original mission was, to keep people safe and strengthen the American defense posture from the single person up to the entire infrastructure that we rely on day-to-day. The mission has shifted to offense after 9/11 so there's conflicting goals here (can't patch something we're using against the bad guys)
- nojito 5y ago
  NSA was always about offense and is strictly for international offense. The only shift after 9/11 was getting the three agencies to actually talk to each other.
  - vajrabum 5y ago
    It says on their mission statement that they do SIGINT and information assurance (i.e. IT security) and there is plenty of public evidence that they do both. Plus they've been deeply involved with designing cryptographic protocols and equipment for the US govt for a very long time which is part of SIGINT but it's not the offensive part. https://www.nsa.gov/about/mission-values/ https://www.nsa.gov/about/mission-values/
- AlexCoventry 5y ago
  The NSA was created in a reorganization of US SIGINT/COMINT services, because SIGINT/COMINT during the Korean War had been unsatisfactory. Its primary mandate has always been COMINT. https://www.nsa.gov/about/cryptologic-heritage/historical-figures-publications/publications/korean-war/koreanwar-sigint-bkg/#14 https://www.nsa.gov/about/cryptologic-heritage/historical-fi... > The Brownell Committee suggested that the creation of AFSA could be seen as a "step backward," and recommended that the power of the director, AFSA, to centralize COMINT be increased. > In October, Harry Truman authorized a reorganization and renaming of AFSA, and in November, the secretary of defense authorized the replacement of AFSA by the National Security Agency.
- wil421 5y ago
  No it wasn't. Take a look at the movie Enemy of the State that was released in 1998, 3 years before 9/11. In the movie the NSA is monitoring all calls, has NRO satellites that tail them, and a bunch of other Tinfoil hat stuff that was confirmed by the Snowden leaks a decade later. The biggest fiction in the movie was their ability to connect the dots and do stuff in real time as depicted. The NSA director even said they were appalled how the agents were portrayed and went on PR campaigns to defend them selves. They were always spying but not ruthless killers as depicted in the movie. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enemy_of_the_State_(film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enemy_of_the_State_(film)
hugh-avherald 5y ago
It explicitly says 'minimal sensitivity'. That basically means the threat vector is "I left it at the cafe."
CompuHacker 5y ago
If every NSA employee has a perfect security posture, any adversary is going to have to take more extreme measures to get information. Better to let them have the occasional un-updated iPhone.
- imwillofficial 5y ago
  No it’s not. The best way is to break them with your h yielding security posture.
twox2 5y ago
I went to a legal presentation at Defcon a couple of years back where they said that the government needs a court order / warrant in order to force you to tell them your password, but if you're using biometrics, they can just force you to touch your finger to your phone or scan your eyes without it. It's some legal loophole.... so in that respect I think passwords ARE more secure.
- ne9xt 5y ago
  Smart, but there is a way to force your (faceid/touchid) iphone to require your password by holding the power button to get to the "slide to power off" screen.
- greggturkington 5y ago
  A defendant was compelled to use their face to unlock their computer in a recent case (2021) [1]. The reasoning given by an analyst: > requiring a defendant to expose his face to unlock a computer can be lawful, and is not far removed from other procedures that are now routinely approved by courts, with proper justification: standing in a lineup, submitting a handwriting or voice exemplar, or submitting a blood or DNA sample Contrasting the logic used by a judge in a similar case in (2019) [2]: > If a person cannot be compelled to provide a passcode because it is a testimonial communication, a person cannot be compelled to provide one’s finger, thumb, iris, face, or other biometric feature to unlock that same device Ars has a summary of more cases [3]. It looks like in several instances state courts allowed the devices to be unlocked using biometrics, but the rulings were reversed at the federal level. In many cases a warrant was required. 1. https://archive.is/i2Bx9 https://archive.is/i2Bx9 2. https://archive.is/px2Qz https://archive.is/px2Qz 3. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/indiana-supreme-court-its-unconstitutional-to-force-phone-unlocking/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/indiana-supreme-...
- panzagl 5y ago
  Presumably NSA employees are not using their phones for illegal activities, so they should not be in a situation where a court will order them to unlock their phone.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
sandworm101 5y ago
>> biometrics are recommended. Maybe by the NSA. Any defense attorney will tell you otherwise. If your fingerprint unlocks your phone then the cops will hold your finger to the phone. If you face unlocks your phone then they will do that too. A pin/password means you retain at least some control. If this was an Archer episode, I'd point out that while dead people cannot divulge pins/passwords their fingerprints still work.
- derefr 5y ago
  I believe they're recommending setting your phone up in a "lock immediately upon sleep; require password after five minutes" configuration. Passwords are better than biometrics for security; but between password validations, presuming some level of convenience is needed, using biometrics to check that the same person is still there is better than "just stay unlocked for a few minutes even after being put to sleep". It's like HTTP Basic Auth (sending credentials with every request), vs. logging in, receiving a short-lived session cookie, and then sending that session cookie with your requests for a few minutes.
- bradknowles 5y ago
  PIN/password to unlock the device, plus biometrics to access certain sensitive data or applications on the device. It’s not perfect, but I think it strikes the best balance.
nonameiguess 5y ago
It says to protect your lock screen with a password, and additionally protect minimally sensitive data on an already-unlocked device with biometrics for convenience.

Kinda surprised biometrics are recommended. I’ve always thought passcodes were more secure - particularly as the data is not easily accessible by interrogators for example.

WrtCdEvrydy 5y ago

Biometrics are recommended if the data is not classified. Remember this is for people working on sensitive information. This is what the NSA's original mission was, to keep people safe and strengthen the American defense posture from the single person up to the entire infrastructure that we rely on day-to-day. The mission has shifted to offense after 9/11 so there's conflicting goals here (can't patch something we're using against the bad guys)

nojito 5y ago
NSA was always about offense and is strictly for international offense. The only shift after 9/11 was getting the three agencies to actually talk to each other.
- vajrabum 5y ago
  It says on their mission statement that they do SIGINT and information assurance (i.e. IT security) and there is plenty of public evidence that they do both. Plus they've been deeply involved with designing cryptographic protocols and equipment for the US govt for a very long time which is part of SIGINT but it's not the offensive part. https://www.nsa.gov/about/mission-values/ https://www.nsa.gov/about/mission-values/
AlexCoventry 5y ago
The NSA was created in a reorganization of US SIGINT/COMINT services, because SIGINT/COMINT during the Korean War had been unsatisfactory. Its primary mandate has always been COMINT. https://www.nsa.gov/about/cryptologic-heritage/historical-figures-publications/publications/korean-war/koreanwar-sigint-bkg/#14 https://www.nsa.gov/about/cryptologic-heritage/historical-fi... > The Brownell Committee suggested that the creation of AFSA could be seen as a "step backward," and recommended that the power of the director, AFSA, to centralize COMINT be increased. > In October, Harry Truman authorized a reorganization and renaming of AFSA, and in November, the secretary of defense authorized the replacement of AFSA by the National Security Agency.
wil421 5y ago
No it wasn't. Take a look at the movie Enemy of the State that was released in 1998, 3 years before 9/11. In the movie the NSA is monitoring all calls, has NRO satellites that tail them, and a bunch of other Tinfoil hat stuff that was confirmed by the Snowden leaks a decade later. The biggest fiction in the movie was their ability to connect the dots and do stuff in real time as depicted. The NSA director even said they were appalled how the agents were portrayed and went on PR campaigns to defend them selves. They were always spying but not ruthless killers as depicted in the movie. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enemy_of_the_State_(film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enemy_of_the_State_(film)

hugh-avherald 5y ago

It explicitly says 'minimal sensitivity'. That basically means the threat vector is "I left it at the cafe."

CompuHacker 5y ago

If every NSA employee has a perfect security posture, any adversary is going to have to take more extreme measures to get information. Better to let them have the occasional un-updated iPhone.

imwillofficial 5y ago
No it’s not. The best way is to break them with your h yielding security posture.

twox2 5y ago

I went to a legal presentation at Defcon a couple of years back where they said that the government needs a court order / warrant in order to force you to tell them your password, but if you're using biometrics, they can just force you to touch your finger to your phone or scan your eyes without it. It's some legal loophole.... so in that respect I think passwords ARE more secure.

ne9xt 5y ago
Smart, but there is a way to force your (faceid/touchid) iphone to require your password by holding the power button to get to the "slide to power off" screen.
greggturkington 5y ago
A defendant was compelled to use their face to unlock their computer in a recent case (2021) [1]. The reasoning given by an analyst: > requiring a defendant to expose his face to unlock a computer can be lawful, and is not far removed from other procedures that are now routinely approved by courts, with proper justification: standing in a lineup, submitting a handwriting or voice exemplar, or submitting a blood or DNA sample Contrasting the logic used by a judge in a similar case in (2019) [2]: > If a person cannot be compelled to provide a passcode because it is a testimonial communication, a person cannot be compelled to provide one’s finger, thumb, iris, face, or other biometric feature to unlock that same device Ars has a summary of more cases [3]. It looks like in several instances state courts allowed the devices to be unlocked using biometrics, but the rulings were reversed at the federal level. In many cases a warrant was required. 1. https://archive.is/i2Bx9 https://archive.is/i2Bx9 2. https://archive.is/px2Qz https://archive.is/px2Qz 3. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/indiana-supreme-court-its-unconstitutional-to-force-phone-unlocking/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/indiana-supreme-...
panzagl 5y ago
Presumably NSA employees are not using their phones for illegal activities, so they should not be in a situation where a court will order them to unlock their phone.
2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago

sandworm101 5y ago

>> biometrics are recommended. Maybe by the NSA. Any defense attorney will tell you otherwise. If your fingerprint unlocks your phone then the cops will hold your finger to the phone. If you face unlocks your phone then they will do that too. A pin/password means you retain at least some control. If this was an Archer episode, I'd point out that while dead people cannot divulge pins/passwords their fingerprints still work.

derefr 5y ago
I believe they're recommending setting your phone up in a "lock immediately upon sleep; require password after five minutes" configuration. Passwords are better than biometrics for security; but between password validations, presuming some level of convenience is needed, using biometrics to check that the same person is still there is better than "just stay unlocked for a few minutes even after being put to sleep". It's like HTTP Basic Auth (sending credentials with every request), vs. logging in, receiving a short-lived session cookie, and then sending that session cookie with your requests for a few minutes.
bradknowles 5y ago
PIN/password to unlock the device, plus biometrics to access certain sensitive data or applications on the device. It’s not perfect, but I think it strikes the best balance.

nonameiguess 5y ago

It says to protect your lock screen with a password, and additionally protect minimally sensitive data on an already-unlocked device with biometrics for convenience.