3 ms·

A couple of years back, the last time fingerprints and biometric authentication became popular (mostly for notebooks, I believe), CCC managed to beat a lot of f

A couple of years back, the last time fingerprints and biometric authentication became popular (mostly for notebooks, I believe), CCC managed to beat a lot of fingerprint readers with essentially a bit of tape. Is there any evidence so far that these readers are better armed against the most trivial of attacks? Another problem with all kinds of biometric authentication is of course that you can't exactly change your fingerprint. So if your credentials ever become compromised you have a bit of a problem.

interpol_p 13y ago
There is only the claim that the Apple sensor reads a "sub-epidermal" layer of skin. We'll have to see if people manage to fool it with standard tricks in the coming days.
- panic 13y ago
  Relatively low-quality gel casts don't seem to work: http://blog.fortinet.com/iPhone-5s--Basic-Fingerprint-Replication-Methods-Stymied-by-TouchID-Sensor/ http://blog.fortinet.com/iPhone-5s--Basic-Fingerprint-Replic...
tombrossman 13y ago
What I don't get is why people are comfortable using something that uniquely identifies themselves as a password, not a user ID. To me, this is backwards thinking. The fingerprint reader could still be useful, once scanned you may enter your password or passcode and unlock the device. Put differently, would you be comfortable leaving a copy of your passwords on everything you touch? If not, why not? I bought my first real 'desktop replacement' laptop years ago, a Thinkpad T61P. It cost a fortune but it blew every other laptop I used away, and had a fingerprint reader which I though was really cool. Then I saw the YouTube videos starting to surface with people using gummy bears to defeat them. I was disappointed, sure, but I just disabled the fingerprint scanner and enjoyed the rest of the functionality of the laptop. I think the sensible thing to do if you buy a new iPhone is to recognise Apple got it wrong with the fingerprint reader, and enjoy all the other cool features of your new phone. It isn't an 'all or nothing' proposition. I also think there is an opportunity for Apple to offer users the choice whether the fingerprint should be used as the username or password.

interpol_p 13y ago

There is only the claim that the Apple sensor reads a "sub-epidermal" layer of skin. We'll have to see if people manage to fool it with standard tricks in the coming days.

panic 13y ago
Relatively low-quality gel casts don't seem to work: http://blog.fortinet.com/iPhone-5s--Basic-Fingerprint-Replication-Methods-Stymied-by-TouchID-Sensor/ http://blog.fortinet.com/iPhone-5s--Basic-Fingerprint-Replic...

tombrossman 13y ago

What I don't get is why people are comfortable using something that uniquely identifies themselves as a password, not a user ID. To me, this is backwards thinking. The fingerprint reader could still be useful, once scanned you may enter your password or passcode and unlock the device. Put differently, would you be comfortable leaving a copy of your passwords on everything you touch? If not, why not? I bought my first real 'desktop replacement' laptop years ago, a Thinkpad T61P. It cost a fortune but it blew every other laptop I used away, and had a fingerprint reader which I though was really cool. Then I saw the YouTube videos starting to surface with people using gummy bears to defeat them. I was disappointed, sure, but I just disabled the fingerprint scanner and enjoyed the rest of the functionality of the laptop. I think the sensible thing to do if you buy a new iPhone is to recognise Apple got it wrong with the fingerprint reader, and enjoy all the other cool features of your new phone. It isn't an 'all or nothing' proposition. I also think there is an opportunity for Apple to offer users the choice whether the fingerprint should be used as the username or password.