In the comments there is so much focus on the convenient aspect of TouchID. I agree, but the main point I think is that we have a situation where: - fingerprin

In the comments there is so much focus on the convenient aspect of TouchID. I agree, but the main point I think is that we have a situation where: - fingerprint authentication will be seen as more casual and mainstream than it was before [1] - people will still leave fingerprints everywhere, including around and on the fingerprint sensors - once a high resolution image of a fingerprint is done, it can be re-used for literaly a lifetime (imagine keeping track of someone for years and use his/her fingerprints anytime it's needed) - if enough applications rely on fingeprint authentication, exchanging fingerprint databases might become lucrative enough From this point of view, seeing TouchID as just a cute way adding some security to a phone is too candid I think. It will have an immediate positive effect for casual phone locking, but would bring much worse effects down the line. Optimisticly no one would rely on fingerprints alone to authenticate users for anything important. But the definition of what's important is blurry, and there is so many situations now where weak passwords are used, but it would be so tempting to switch to fingerprints (door unlock for instance...). [1] laptops had finger unlock features for years now, but it never really made it to the wild masses I think. Fujitsu phones had a fingerprint reader too, but again, I don't remember other makers picking up the feature.