3 ms·

Secrecy is only an approximation of difficulty. Given the difficulty, I would estimate it as a two character password. It should be fine for people who have not

Secrecy is only an approximation of difficulty. Given the difficulty, I would estimate it as a two character password. It should be fine for people who have nothing to hide.

RHSeeger 5y ago
> It should be fine for people who have nothing to hide. There are no people that have nothing to hide. There are only people that don't know what they should be hiding.
- madeofpalk 5y ago
  Just a clumsy way of saying "not within my threat matrix"
  - eftychis 5y ago
    I would rephrase it as a paradigm of the phrase they are or going to be the sucker at the poker table and don't know about it.
the_snooze 5y ago
>It should be fine for people who have nothing to hide. If I'm a company, would I want my employees to give up proprietary data they hold just because they personally "have nothing to hide?" Anyone who thinks that's acceptable is someone who isn't worthy of trust.
mankyd 5y ago
> Given the difficulty, I would estimate it as a two character password. Sorry, but that is _way_ off. I can run through 2 character passwords by hand in a few hours at most, likely faster. (Assuming a qwerty keyboard, 62 alphanumeric, plus roughly 33 other characters makes for 9025 possible passwords.) To reproduce a fingerprint requires access, money, time, and expertise. It's not _hard_ but it is not trivial either. You need access to a good fingerprint. You need the money to buy the supplies (a laser printer, some acetate, and some wood glue). You need time to both capture the fingerprint, refine it in the photo editor of you choice, and then actually turn it into something that scans. And you need to know that this is all actually doable. And then that all assumes that it actually works; I can assure you this is not a 100% success rate. Put another way, if you told me you _personally_ had a two character password on a specific account, I could likely log into it _today_. Conversely, if you told me it also required a fingerprint to log into, I'd be out of luck. I'd have to learn who you are, where you lived, and then concoct a way to capture a clean print. As others have pointed out, biometrics != password. It's an apples to oranges comparison.

Secrecy is only an approximation of difficulty. Given the difficulty, I would estimate it as a two character password. It should be fine for people who have nothing to hide.

RHSeeger 5y ago

> It should be fine for people who have nothing to hide. There are no people that have nothing to hide. There are only people that don't know what they should be hiding.

madeofpalk 5y ago
Just a clumsy way of saying "not within my threat matrix"
- eftychis 5y ago
  I would rephrase it as a paradigm of the phrase they are or going to be the sucker at the poker table and don't know about it.

the_snooze 5y ago

>It should be fine for people who have nothing to hide. If I'm a company, would I want my employees to give up proprietary data they hold just because they personally "have nothing to hide?" Anyone who thinks that's acceptable is someone who isn't worthy of trust.

mankyd 5y ago

> Given the difficulty, I would estimate it as a two character password. Sorry, but that is _way_ off. I can run through 2 character passwords by hand in a few hours at most, likely faster. (Assuming a qwerty keyboard, 62 alphanumeric, plus roughly 33 other characters makes for 9025 possible passwords.) To reproduce a fingerprint requires access, money, time, and expertise. It's not _hard_ but it is not trivial either. You need access to a good fingerprint. You need the money to buy the supplies (a laser printer, some acetate, and some wood glue). You need time to both capture the fingerprint, refine it in the photo editor of you choice, and then actually turn it into something that scans. And you need to know that this is all actually doable. And then that all assumes that it actually works; I can assure you this is not a 100% success rate. Put another way, if you told me you _personally_ had a two character password on a specific account, I could likely log into it _today_. Conversely, if you told me it also required a fingerprint to log into, I'd be out of luck. I'd have to learn who you are, where you lived, and then concoct a way to capture a clean print. As others have pointed out, biometrics != password. It's an apples to oranges comparison.