3 ms·
I didn't downvote, but your post is off topic. If the article was about a case where a person was mandated to unlock their phone because it is only protected b
by dfxm12 12y ago
I didn't downvote, but your post is off topic.
If the article was about a case where a person was mandated to unlock their phone because it is only protected by a fingerprint scan, (and of course a person cannot "forget" their fingerprint like they can a password), then your quote would have been on topic.
Yeah, the quote is about fingerprints, but it's really orthogonal to the topic of the article, which is that fingerprints can be "cracked" just like passwords. That's not what the quote you posted is about. The quote is about the fifth amendment (of the US constitution): https://www.eff.org/issues/know-your-rights#17 https://www.eff.org/issues/know-your-rights#17
- mkal_tsr 12y agoYou don't think the ability to use photographs of hands/fingers and used for fingerprint readers is relevant to a quote about using fingerprints as passwords has a security gap of consent? I'm sorry but what? We've seen many times that fingerprint readers can be fooled, and pointing out that pictures of hands/fingers could be used against you is highly relevant to a decision of securing something with fingerprints or not.