4 ms·
IMO, the big problem with biometric is that it is non revokeable.
by ufo 14y ago
IMO, the big problem with biometric is that it is non revokeable.
- SoftwareMaven 14y agoSure it is, the same way a password is revocable: pull e "hash" out of the database you compare against.
- jrockway 14y agoHow does IT issue you a new fingerprint?
- DigitalJack 14y agoSuper Glue and Silly Putty
- bonaldi 14y agoWell, in most cases there are nine other digits you can use. That's probably a reasonable amount of redundancy.
- jrockway 14y agoI change my password more than 9 times a year, and I plan to live for more than one year.
- bonaldi 14y agoThat's not IT issuing you a new password, that's you changing it. The point is that biometrics are perfectly feasible as one of the two factors (instead of something you know) and can still be revoked.
- jrockway 14y agoI also don't leave my password on everything I touch. Biometrics are a terrible idea. Password + token is much safer and infinitely revokable. And the server can even tell when an HOTP device has been cloned.
- SoftwareMaven 14y agoThat, and not the revocability, is the core of the problem. It also comes back to a foundation of security: something you have and something you know. Personally, I think most biometrics are bunk, unless you use multiple (fingerprint, iris, etc) along with some kind of password.
- pyre 14y agoA white-hot knife to the finger?
- tedunangst 14y agoIt's really only workable when authing to the device. Not over a network. I'd basically assume that anyone can forge your biometric info, so it's only applicable in scenarios where the forgery is hard to execute.
- hnriot 14y agoof course it is, you use the biometric signature to sign certificates that you can revoke.
- kamjam 14y agoAnd it also leads to issues like Minority Report, where instead of someone stealing your wallet, they steal your eye balls :(