5 ms·

Did you read the article? To crack the sensor, the would-be malevolent party needs a _2400 DPI photo of the fingerprint._ TouchID is highly secure if the only

Did you read the article? To crack the sensor, the would-be malevolent party needs a _2400 DPI photo of the fingerprint._ TouchID is highly secure if the only way to break into it is to have an ultra high-def image of the exact finger the device is looking for. I guess 50 character-long passcodes aren't secure because you could just tell a thief the code?

varjag 13y ago
2400 dpi is nothing out of ordinary for a half decent scanner or a digital camera at 1:1 reproduction.
bdamm 13y ago
2400 DPI is not that hard to achieve. Any DSLR can do it with a macro lens attachment and a flash. Many scanners can do it as well.
icambron 13y ago
Yes, I read the article. We must have wildly different definitions of "highly". I'm pretty confident I could reproduce this result in one afternoon. Compare that to other things we might consider highly secure, like strong encryption or Fort Knox. What word do you use for security measures that take non-trivial resources to circumvent?
- hippee-lee 13y ago
  And the social aspect? Is it common for you to obtain the image of the correct finger and then the phone from a stranger? How do you approach that part of the problem?
  - icambron 13y ago
    It's not common for me to do that, but it's also not common for me to try breaking into iPhones. But if I were trying to break into an iPhone, perhaps the finger prints are on the phone. Or some other item I also got as part of the same theft. Or I found the phone in the owner's house when I robbed it and have my pick of surfaces. Or I have the owner's prints in a database because they went were convicted of a crime(I admit I have no idea what resolution those are taken at). I don't think there's a shortage possibilities. You leave prints on almost everything you touch. To be extra clear, I'm not saying the finger print reader isn't good enough for most iPhone users; I'm not arguing the nth-grandparent's point about that. My point is that it's not highly secure, and Apple shouldn't be marketing it that way. Similarly, the lock on my front door is plenty good for my house, but no one would ever describe my house as highly secure.
    - hippee-lee 13y ago
      Got it and I understand your comment a bit better. I hadn't thought of the fingerprint lifted from the phone scenario. You do have a very valid argument.
001sky 13y ago
a _2400 DPI photo of the fingerprint._ It needs a 2400 dpi output. This is not hard. 300 ppi source can easily generate a 2400 dpi output. DPI =/= PPI.

varjag 13y ago

2400 dpi is nothing out of ordinary for a half decent scanner or a digital camera at 1:1 reproduction.

bdamm 13y ago

2400 DPI is not that hard to achieve. Any DSLR can do it with a macro lens attachment and a flash. Many scanners can do it as well.

icambron 13y ago

Yes, I read the article. We must have wildly different definitions of "highly". I'm pretty confident I could reproduce this result in one afternoon. Compare that to other things we might consider highly secure, like strong encryption or Fort Knox. What word do you use for security measures that take non-trivial resources to circumvent?

hippee-lee 13y ago
And the social aspect? Is it common for you to obtain the image of the correct finger and then the phone from a stranger? How do you approach that part of the problem?
- icambron 13y ago
  It's not common for me to do that, but it's also not common for me to try breaking into iPhones. But if I were trying to break into an iPhone, perhaps the finger prints are on the phone. Or some other item I also got as part of the same theft. Or I found the phone in the owner's house when I robbed it and have my pick of surfaces. Or I have the owner's prints in a database because they went were convicted of a crime(I admit I have no idea what resolution those are taken at). I don't think there's a shortage possibilities. You leave prints on almost everything you touch. To be extra clear, I'm not saying the finger print reader isn't good enough for most iPhone users; I'm not arguing the nth-grandparent's point about that. My point is that it's not highly secure, and Apple shouldn't be marketing it that way. Similarly, the lock on my front door is plenty good for my house, but no one would ever describe my house as highly secure.
  - hippee-lee 13y ago
    Got it and I understand your comment a bit better. I hadn't thought of the fingerprint lifted from the phone scenario. You do have a very valid argument.

001sky 13y ago

a _2400 DPI photo of the fingerprint._ It needs a 2400 dpi output. This is not hard. 300 ppi source can easily generate a 2400 dpi output. DPI =/= PPI.