6 ms·

Senator asks if FBI can get iPhone 5S fingerprint data via Patriot Act

81 points by 6thSigma 13y ago

joshowens 13y ago
We sat in our office and joked about this very thing when we watched the announcement. Sad, really.
thabofletcher 13y ago
That will be released on the iPhone 6.66
eksith 13y ago
It should be worth noting, taking someone's fingerprint and duplicating it is surprisingly easy. In fact, a duplicate print has been used to open door locks and even computer locks as the Mythbusters have shown : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Hji3kp_i9k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Hji3kp_i9k
- prjw 13y ago
  Back in 2008, the CCC even stole and published a fingerprint of Wolfgang Schäuble, who was the Minister of the Interior in Germany at that time. http://www.h-online.com/newsticker/news/item/CCC-publishes-fingerprints-of-German-Home-Secretary-734713.html http://www.h-online.com/newsticker/news/item/CCC-publishes-f...
  - gte910h 13y ago
    "Stole" is a pretty heightened word for something we leave on literally everything we touch
- pvidler 13y ago
  This seems specific to image-based fingerprint sensors? Apple's version does not appear to work this way...
- dobbsbob 13y ago
  CCC in Germany did the same thing, lifted a gov minister's fingerprint from a glass and made a duplicate to defeat a door lock
- JabavuAdams 13y ago
  Interesting, but obviously being able to lift fingerprints remotely is worse than having to physically access the target's handled objects.
  - eksith 13y ago
    That's very true. IMO Apple has already thought of this and I think they're not storing the fingerprint or even a direct hash or other signature of it on the device. They may be using some sort of unique key (a salt perhaps?) that is used in conjunction with the fingerprint to generate the final password. It's also possible that it may not be a "password" in the conventional sense. Maybe the fingerprint only serves as part of the private key of a public/private key pair where only the public key is stored on the device itself and the private key must be generated each time with a scan of the finger. This is all speculation, of course.
    - jack-r-abbit 13y ago
      > This is all speculation, of course. I suppose that is why we have people asking the questions.
- baddox 13y ago
  This seems like it would be a more powerful argument if the fingerprint sensor on the iPhone was used for more things than unlocking your phone and making App Store and iTunes purchases. As it is now, Touch ID doesn't need to be technically more secure, dynamic, or anonymous than a passcode or password, it just needs to be faster and more convenient. And what does a perpetrator do once they've lifted your fingerprint and made a copy? They still have to steal your phone or gain access to it for some amount of time, which requires very personal targeting.
- r00fus 13y ago
  It should be worth noting that the fingerprint sensor on the iPhone5S is far more advanced than that door. Read up on more details and critique about TouchID: http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/09/fingerprints-as-passwords-new-iphone-touch-id-gets-mixed-security-verdict/ http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/09/fingerprints-as-pass...
  - eksith 13y ago
    The door scanner may be easily fooled, but the computer login scanner they worked on is a bit more sophisticated. The "sub-epidermal" scan is actually what a gelatin synthetic fingerprint with a latex skin would duplicate fairly well. It's important to note the scanner isn't an imaging sensor (I.E. camera) so touch and skin conductivity are still fair game.
kevinpet 13y ago
And this illustrates my problem with Franken and all the far left -- government agencies are trampling over Americans' privacy, and his issue is whether a private company is taking sufficient safeguards to avoid making it easier for the government to trample that privacy. As opposed to, you know, getting government to stop abusing its power. Half of his questions are "what's Apple's legal interpretation of our abusive laws?" It doesn't really matter what Apple's interpretation is. What matters is the secret court's secret decisions about what those laws mean. It's good that Franken voted against renewing the Patriot act, but he should be sending this letter to his colleagues that voted for it, not Apple.
- joshowens 13y ago
  So true. The patriot act is the real issue here, not Apple and it's tech.
- Osmium 13y ago
  Or, you know, you could do both. If it's politically achievable to safeguard people's private data from private companies, then why not do that? This is the old "why bother with solving x when people are starving in y?" argument, which has never been too convincing. And, for the record, I'm very interested to know what Apple's interpretation of the law is, because that could be what informs the design of their products.
  - kevinpet 13y ago
    No this isn't "how can you worry about iphones while children are starving in Africa". If he had written a letter that only addressed the issues of whether Apple was exposing customers to security problems or future impersonation, then your criticism would be valid. Half his questions are about domestic spying and how the fingerprint reader impacts it. You can read the actual letter here: http://www.franken.senate.gov/files/documents/130919AppleTouchID.pdf http://www.franken.senate.gov/files/documents/130919AppleTou...
    - somebehemoth 13y ago
wtvanhest 13y ago
The answer to this problem is to create a technology which allows for easy replication of fingerprints once you have a digital copy. Once that technology exists it will completely remove the use and value of fingerprints since the existence of a finger print won't prove anything. 3D printers could provide that system as long as they are precise enough to print fingerprints at scale.
- bradleysmith 13y ago
  That's an interesting solution. re-create some super VIP's prints and plant them in undesirable places they obviously did not go to; then publicize it. Render the whole 'fingerprint as an identifier' thing with uncertainty and doubt. I believe Objet/Stratsys still have the highest resolution printers at 16 micron layers and 30 micron-width droplets. A quick google search says the papillary ridges of a fingerprint could be safely assumed at between .020 and 2.0mm in height[1]; that might be printable now. Fun thought, anyway. [1]-http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=216913 http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=216913
gdubs 13y ago
It's not like a scanner that's taking a picture of a finger and storing the image on a chip. From what I can tell, the biometric markers of individual fingerprints are used as a hash to generate a strong password -- much stronger than a user generated password. The fact is, the standard 4 digit pins that most users use are not very secure. (From what I can recall of a recent security seminar I attended.) Given the privacy concerns that have been news lately, it's understandable that this would raise some eyebrows, but when combined with something like the iCloud keychain for generating strong online passwords, this could actually be a great benefit to individual privacy.
- eksith 13y ago
  It's possible the device is storing a second key of some sort as well as regenerate each time a fingerprint is set. It may even regenerate it each time a scan is done and reset the password. I.E. hash( hash(fingerprint) + stored key ) = actual password.
  - joshstrange 13y ago
    IIRC I think I saw someone else saying that each fingerprint hash was hashed with a key specific to each phone so that if you were able to extract the fingerprint hash it would be unusable on the target's other devices. I cannot find the source for this so please take this with a large grain of salt.
robbiemitchell 13y ago
lol "Passwords are secret and dynamic" Passwords are often static, shared, and relatively easy to crack.
- JabavuAdams 13y ago
  That's not the point. The point is that the fingerprint uniquely identifies you, and it's difficult to change. It's like using your SIN as a secret.
  - mikeash 13y ago
    Well, it's currently pretty easy to change. I use my fingerprint in exactly one place right now: as the unlock code for my new iPhone. (Yep, I stood in line and everything.) If somehow my fingerprint got stolen, I could trivially change the unlock code by switching back to a regular passcode and disabling the fingerprint unlock. I don't understand the big concern over this fingerprint sensor. I get the idea of some concern on a theoretical level, but compared to the rest of any smartphone's ready-made spying functions, like the ability to see where you are at any point in the day, the ability to record or even transmit live every conversation you have, the ability to steal every password you enter into the device, etc. etc., fingerprint theft seems completely unimportant. So far, I've yet to get a satisfactory answer to just what bad things would happen if the NSA was, in fact stealing everyone's iPhone fingerprint data. I'd rather they not, but it's minor compared to everything else that's going on.
    - r00fus 13y ago
      Furthermore, if Apple did it right, they'd store a hashed reading of the fingerprint, and probably salt that with the device's ID or some private key unique to the device (quite straightforward). So that would mean that even if someone stole your print (say the stored hash), it wouldn't work without the iPhone. At that point, in order to attack someone's AppStore account with a fingerprint, it becomes 2-factor security... and that "something to have" token can be revoked by remote wipe.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
Raphmedia 13y ago
"You have only ten of them." Did anybody think of using toes yet?
- r00fus 13y ago
  Yes. http://reviews.cnet.com/iphone-5s/ http://reviews.cnet.com/iphone-5s/ "The Touch ID-enabled home button feels invisible; it works with a tap, can recognize your finger from many angles, and feels like it has less of a fail rate than fingerprint sensors I've used on laptops. It's impressive tech. It worked on all my fingers, and even my toe (I was curious)."
pvnick 13y ago
Looks like the anti-spying-stories brigade is out in full force today flagging this and the two stories about GCHQ hacking the Belgian telecom companies
mumbi 13y ago
why isn't this on the first page? 42 points in an hour? I see something with 42 points in 2 hours on the first page.
crazygringo 13y ago
I still don't understand all this uproar over fingerprinting. Fingerprints are obviously incredibly insecure. They're obviously identifiable. How is this news? Fingerprint readers on phones are like locks on doors -- they deter casual people, but are totally worthless against anyone determined. But still pretty useful for their convenience in most situations. Fingerprint readers on phones are for preventing your mother or your girlfriend or your son or your coworker from getting into your phone. And nothing more. It does zilch against police/government/espionage/etc. But it was never supposed to, any more than your front lock is supposed to keep a SWAT team out.

81 points by 6thSigma 13y ago

joshowens 13y ago

We sat in our office and joked about this very thing when we watched the announcement. Sad, really.

thabofletcher 13y ago

That will be released on the iPhone 6.66

eksith 13y ago

It should be worth noting, taking someone's fingerprint and duplicating it is surprisingly easy. In fact, a duplicate print has been used to open door locks and even computer locks as the Mythbusters have shown : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Hji3kp_i9k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Hji3kp_i9k

prjw 13y ago
Back in 2008, the CCC even stole and published a fingerprint of Wolfgang Schäuble, who was the Minister of the Interior in Germany at that time. http://www.h-online.com/newsticker/news/item/CCC-publishes-fingerprints-of-German-Home-Secretary-734713.html http://www.h-online.com/newsticker/news/item/CCC-publishes-f...
- gte910h 13y ago
  "Stole" is a pretty heightened word for something we leave on literally everything we touch
pvidler 13y ago
This seems specific to image-based fingerprint sensors? Apple's version does not appear to work this way...
dobbsbob 13y ago
CCC in Germany did the same thing, lifted a gov minister's fingerprint from a glass and made a duplicate to defeat a door lock
JabavuAdams 13y ago
Interesting, but obviously being able to lift fingerprints remotely is worse than having to physically access the target's handled objects.
- eksith 13y ago
  That's very true. IMO Apple has already thought of this and I think they're not storing the fingerprint or even a direct hash or other signature of it on the device. They may be using some sort of unique key (a salt perhaps?) that is used in conjunction with the fingerprint to generate the final password. It's also possible that it may not be a "password" in the conventional sense. Maybe the fingerprint only serves as part of the private key of a public/private key pair where only the public key is stored on the device itself and the private key must be generated each time with a scan of the finger. This is all speculation, of course.
  - jack-r-abbit 13y ago
    > This is all speculation, of course. I suppose that is why we have people asking the questions.
baddox 13y ago
This seems like it would be a more powerful argument if the fingerprint sensor on the iPhone was used for more things than unlocking your phone and making App Store and iTunes purchases. As it is now, Touch ID doesn't need to be technically more secure, dynamic, or anonymous than a passcode or password, it just needs to be faster and more convenient. And what does a perpetrator do once they've lifted your fingerprint and made a copy? They still have to steal your phone or gain access to it for some amount of time, which requires very personal targeting.
r00fus 13y ago
It should be worth noting that the fingerprint sensor on the iPhone5S is far more advanced than that door. Read up on more details and critique about TouchID: http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/09/fingerprints-as-passwords-new-iphone-touch-id-gets-mixed-security-verdict/ http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/09/fingerprints-as-pass...
- eksith 13y ago
  The door scanner may be easily fooled, but the computer login scanner they worked on is a bit more sophisticated. The "sub-epidermal" scan is actually what a gelatin synthetic fingerprint with a latex skin would duplicate fairly well. It's important to note the scanner isn't an imaging sensor (I.E. camera) so touch and skin conductivity are still fair game.

kevinpet 13y ago

And this illustrates my problem with Franken and all the far left -- government agencies are trampling over Americans' privacy, and his issue is whether a private company is taking sufficient safeguards to avoid making it easier for the government to trample that privacy. As opposed to, you know, getting government to stop abusing its power. Half of his questions are "what's Apple's legal interpretation of our abusive laws?" It doesn't really matter what Apple's interpretation is. What matters is the secret court's secret decisions about what those laws mean. It's good that Franken voted against renewing the Patriot act, but he should be sending this letter to his colleagues that voted for it, not Apple.

joshowens 13y ago
So true. The patriot act is the real issue here, not Apple and it's tech.
Osmium 13y ago
Or, you know, you could do both. If it's politically achievable to safeguard people's private data from private companies, then why not do that? This is the old "why bother with solving x when people are starving in y?" argument, which has never been too convincing. And, for the record, I'm very interested to know what Apple's interpretation of the law is, because that could be what informs the design of their products.
- kevinpet 13y ago
  No this isn't "how can you worry about iphones while children are starving in Africa". If he had written a letter that only addressed the issues of whether Apple was exposing customers to security problems or future impersonation, then your criticism would be valid. Half his questions are about domestic spying and how the fingerprint reader impacts it. You can read the actual letter here: http://www.franken.senate.gov/files/documents/130919AppleTouchID.pdf http://www.franken.senate.gov/files/documents/130919AppleTou...
  - somebehemoth 13y ago

wtvanhest 13y ago

The answer to this problem is to create a technology which allows for easy replication of fingerprints once you have a digital copy. Once that technology exists it will completely remove the use and value of fingerprints since the existence of a finger print won't prove anything. 3D printers could provide that system as long as they are precise enough to print fingerprints at scale.

bradleysmith 13y ago
That's an interesting solution. re-create some super VIP's prints and plant them in undesirable places they obviously did not go to; then publicize it. Render the whole 'fingerprint as an identifier' thing with uncertainty and doubt. I believe Objet/Stratsys still have the highest resolution printers at 16 micron layers and 30 micron-width droplets. A quick google search says the papillary ridges of a fingerprint could be safely assumed at between .020 and 2.0mm in height[1]; that might be printable now. Fun thought, anyway. [1]-http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=216913 http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=216913

gdubs 13y ago

It's not like a scanner that's taking a picture of a finger and storing the image on a chip. From what I can tell, the biometric markers of individual fingerprints are used as a hash to generate a strong password -- much stronger than a user generated password. The fact is, the standard 4 digit pins that most users use are not very secure. (From what I can recall of a recent security seminar I attended.) Given the privacy concerns that have been news lately, it's understandable that this would raise some eyebrows, but when combined with something like the iCloud keychain for generating strong online passwords, this could actually be a great benefit to individual privacy.

eksith 13y ago
It's possible the device is storing a second key of some sort as well as regenerate each time a fingerprint is set. It may even regenerate it each time a scan is done and reset the password. I.E. hash( hash(fingerprint) + stored key ) = actual password.
- joshstrange 13y ago
  IIRC I think I saw someone else saying that each fingerprint hash was hashed with a key specific to each phone so that if you were able to extract the fingerprint hash it would be unusable on the target's other devices. I cannot find the source for this so please take this with a large grain of salt.

robbiemitchell 13y ago

lol "Passwords are secret and dynamic" Passwords are often static, shared, and relatively easy to crack.

JabavuAdams 13y ago
That's not the point. The point is that the fingerprint uniquely identifies you, and it's difficult to change. It's like using your SIN as a secret.
- mikeash 13y ago
  Well, it's currently pretty easy to change. I use my fingerprint in exactly one place right now: as the unlock code for my new iPhone. (Yep, I stood in line and everything.) If somehow my fingerprint got stolen, I could trivially change the unlock code by switching back to a regular passcode and disabling the fingerprint unlock. I don't understand the big concern over this fingerprint sensor. I get the idea of some concern on a theoretical level, but compared to the rest of any smartphone's ready-made spying functions, like the ability to see where you are at any point in the day, the ability to record or even transmit live every conversation you have, the ability to steal every password you enter into the device, etc. etc., fingerprint theft seems completely unimportant. So far, I've yet to get a satisfactory answer to just what bad things would happen if the NSA was, in fact stealing everyone's iPhone fingerprint data. I'd rather they not, but it's minor compared to everything else that's going on.
  - r00fus 13y ago
    Furthermore, if Apple did it right, they'd store a hashed reading of the fingerprint, and probably salt that with the device's ID or some private key unique to the device (quite straightforward). So that would mean that even if someone stole your print (say the stored hash), it wouldn't work without the iPhone. At that point, in order to attack someone's AppStore account with a fingerprint, it becomes 2-factor security... and that "something to have" token can be revoked by remote wipe.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

Raphmedia 13y ago

"You have only ten of them." Did anybody think of using toes yet?

r00fus 13y ago
Yes. http://reviews.cnet.com/iphone-5s/ http://reviews.cnet.com/iphone-5s/ "The Touch ID-enabled home button feels invisible; it works with a tap, can recognize your finger from many angles, and feels like it has less of a fail rate than fingerprint sensors I've used on laptops. It's impressive tech. It worked on all my fingers, and even my toe (I was curious)."

pvnick 13y ago

Looks like the anti-spying-stories brigade is out in full force today flagging this and the two stories about GCHQ hacking the Belgian telecom companies

mumbi 13y ago

why isn't this on the first page? 42 points in an hour? I see something with 42 points in 2 hours on the first page.

crazygringo 13y ago

I still don't understand all this uproar over fingerprinting. Fingerprints are obviously incredibly insecure. They're obviously identifiable. How is this news? Fingerprint readers on phones are like locks on doors -- they deter casual people, but are totally worthless against anyone determined. But still pretty useful for their convenience in most situations. Fingerprint readers on phones are for preventing your mother or your girlfriend or your son or your coworker from getting into your phone. And nothing more. It does zilch against police/government/espionage/etc. But it was never supposed to, any more than your front lock is supposed to keep a SWAT team out.