backtop


Print 114 comment(s) - last by Piiman.. on Oct 5 at 12:50 PM


  (Source: Apple)
Chaos Computer Club unlocks iPhones with high resolution-image based tactic, points out legal dangers

For iPhone owners that use the fingerprint sensor as a password, be aware that it's pretty much useless from a security perspective.  It turns out that as with past inexpensive fingerprint readers, the system could easily be tricked by showing it a photograph of the target's fingerprint.

A site sponsored a crowd-funded competition to see who could be the first to crack the security feature found on the new Apple, Inc. (AAPLiPhone 5S.  The prize -- which included a pledge of $10,000 USD from a Chicago-based venture capital fund -- attracted a lot of attention.

I. CCC Makes Short Work of Apple's Supposedly Secure Sensor

It appears that the first group to successfully circumvent the sensor's security was the veteran Chaos Computer Club (CCC), a German hacker ring that has accomplished many challenging hacks and exploits over the years.

The trick -- as a CCC member who goes by the handle "Starbug" states -- is to use at least 2,400 dots per inch (dpi) for the photograph of the target's fingerprint, and 1,200 dpi for the printed copy.  Comments "Starbug", "In reality, Apple's sensor has just a higher resolution compared to the sensors so far. So we only needed to ramp up the resolution of our fake.  As we have said now for more than years, fingerprints should not be used to secure anything. You leave them everywhere, and it is far too easy to make fake fingers out of lifted prints."

The hack is demonstrated in a video posted by the CCC to YouTube:


The only "trick" outside the resolution is that you need to print onto a transparent sheet and after printing; you need to lift the fingerprint onto a polymer using "pink latex milk or white woodglue".  The latex layer is then cured and lifted, and breathed upon to "make it a tiny bit moist and then placed onto the sensor to unlock the phone."

Don't make it too moist, though as the fingerprint sensor can only be used with "dry" fingers.

iPhone 5S sensor
The iPhone 5S's sensor can easily be tricked with a "fake finger". [Image Source: Apple]
 
It's important to note that the only part of the process that involves the target user -- getting their fingerprint -- can be done quickly and surreptitiously.  The remaining steps can be taken at their own pace at a secure location of the unlocker's choosing.

II. Another Danger -- Police Seizing Your Data

CCC spokesperson Frank Rieger chides Apple and others for proliferating the myth of security regarding fingerprint-based biometrics.  He states:

We hope that this finally puts to rest the illusions people have about fingerprint biometrics. It is plain stupid to use something that you can't change and that you leave everywhere every day as a security token.  The public should no longer be fooled by the biometrics industry with false security claims. Biometrics is fundamentally a technology designed for oppression and control, not for securing everyday device access.

The group raises another interesting point regarding smartphone unlocking and legality.  The group writes:

Also, you can easily be forced to unlock your phone against your will when being arrested. Forcing you to give up your (hopefully long) passcode is much harder under most jurisdictions than just casually swiping your phone over your handcuffed hands.

Police arrest
If you get arrested, and have an iPhone with fingerprint unlock enabled, police can easily get ahold of your private data. [Image Source: BUSINESS, GOVERNMENT AND SOCIETY FIVE]

In other words, the supposed "crowning" feature on Apple's new smartphone may be worse than worthless -- it may be luring users into a false sense of security and compromising their data.

The site istouchidhackedyet.com says the CCC was the first group or individual to report a successful hack on the sensor.  The site is in the process of confirming the CCC's hack.  Once confirmed they'll receive the horde of goodies, including sweet, sweet cash.

Sources: CCC [press release], Is Touch ID Hacked Yet [YES!], YouTube [CCC]



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

yup
By Motoman on 9/23/2013 1:22:54 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Researchers Call Tech "Plain Stupid"


...which happens to match up nicely with their customer base.




RE: yup
By DrizztVD on 9/23/2013 1:41:00 PM , Rating: 5
So let's see, you lock your front door with a lock that can be crow-barred open right? You lock your gate with a lock that can be opened in 3 seconds with a large bolt cutter?

News flash, there is no locking mechanism short of a private army that will hold any of your possessions safe for any length of time if someone really wanted to get to it. The point is just to make it difficult enough for them not to want to try.

This feature is rather innovative in my opinion. It's not perfect, but its more than good enough. I am not an Apple-fanboi, but I dislike shoddy arguments. This article is just that.


RE: yup
By spaced_ on 9/23/2013 1:46:29 PM , Rating: 5
This is a good point. If you just want a simple locking mechanism for your phone then it's fine. Similar to facial recognition unlock that's been on Android for quite some time.

The danger however is if it's being marketed by Apple as super secure. If so, users are being lulled into a false sense of security.


RE: yup
By vol7ron on 9/23/2013 5:35:34 PM , Rating: 2
RSA had 2-factor authentication compromised (http://www.secureworks.com/cyber-threat-intelligen... which goes to show nothing electronic is ever impenetrable, but so far, I'd say this is secure because of three reasons:

1) The person who wants to compromise your device's security will have to go to great lengths (obtaining your fingerprint, scanning it, molding it, or printing it off at a high resolution) to do so - someone that goes that far to do it is going to find a way.

2) I'd say it's secure enough until the "hack" can be performed w/o the sensor - via the lightning port, audio jack, Bluetooth, or other connection; that is, something that could be done in minutes-to-seconds.

3) There is concern of biometric data being shared. Since you have problems with FB and Google accessing private data, and iCloud being so interleaved into iOS, there is the concern that your personal data, which you can't change, will fall into someone else's hands. That is a huge concern. Apple I think has done a decent job of trying to store this information locally and letting its customers know.

The biggest example against it is the one about the Police, who will readily have that data available. In response, everyday we leave our houses, drive in our cars, or walk down the street. We take risks all the time, even if sometimes we don't realize it. While this is still a higher risk, I'm not sure it's cause for that much concern.


RE: yup
By quiksilvr on 9/23/2013 9:23:40 PM , Rating: 2
*Hands drink with roofie*

Done.


RE: yup
By marvdmartian on 9/25/2013 7:49:42 AM , Rating: 2
Just saw an article, this morning, where one user successfully used his JOHNSON to lock/unlock his new iPhone.

I'm betting that's a part of that feature, that Tim Cook never imagined!

The question isn't whether the more tech-savvy people (like the ones who post here on DT) believe the fingerprint reader is a measure of safety for their phone. It's a matter whether the ignorant masses that actually buy iPhones will believe it.


RE: yup
By Motoman on 9/23/2013 1:59:37 PM , Rating: 5
You're assuming my OP had anything particularly to do with the fingerprint scanner. It didn't.

Also:

quote:
This feature is rather innovative in my opinion.


No it isn't. Such things have been in use for a very long time, including on mobile devices like laptops. As is the rule with an Apple product, there's no innovation anywhere to be found. Just copying an idea someone else had.


RE: yup
By superstition on 9/23/13, Rating: -1
RE: yup
By Motoman on 9/23/2013 2:09:03 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Imagine how popular Bob would have been if Apple has pushed him to all its stupid customers.


iBob would be the king of the world at this point, if that had happened. Or maybe iClippy.


RE: yup
By Bostlabs on 9/23/2013 3:30:08 PM , Rating: 3
Nah, now it it was called iSteve...

Apple couldn't keep that in stock. :)

The fingerprint reader is just an ease of use security device. The easier you make it for the user, the easier you make it for the bad guys.

Let's see... How about retina scan + DNA sample via your breath + facial scan + voice recognition + a complex security phrase.

15 minutes later you can use your phone. LOL!

Best security? Keep the phone turned off and encased in cement. Be tough to use it but it would be secure. :D


RE: yup
By superstition on 9/23/2013 7:29:52 PM , Rating: 2
Scintillating.


RE: yup
By superstition on 9/23/2013 7:33:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I've always been pissed at Apple for not copying more. After all, there was Microsoft Bob. Bob could have been big. Imagine how popular Bob would have been if Apple has pushed him to all its stupid customers.

People can hide Bob, but Bob will be back and he will win.


RE: yup
By augiem on 9/23/2013 7:09:47 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Lisa OS and the Mac OS


Apple's "innovative" OS's that MS copied were copied from Xerox, who gets no credit to this day lost behind the commercial success of the Mac.

Every element is there in Parc/Alto/Star. Icons, folders, right click context menus, windows, etc. 1979, Parc was 4 years before Lisa and Star was 2 years before.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cn4vC80Pv6Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxEmJu8OSug

So, yes, the copycat did win. Both of them.


RE: yup
By superstition on 9/23/13, Rating: -1
RE: yup
By superstition on 9/24/2013 6:00:02 PM , Rating: 2
A graphical interface was described in the 60s, so I suppose Xerox was a copycat, too?

The Mac OS and the Lisa OS were considerably different, but you would have to have used them to know that.

But, really, the pinnacle of innovation was Windows 1.0. What a revolution for computing it was.

The Alto was not even close to the Lisa OS in terms of consumer-friendly functionality and polish. And, the Lisa productivity software was nothing to sneeze at, either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Alto_Neptune_Fil...


RE: yup
By DrizztVD on 9/23/2013 2:19:48 PM , Rating: 2
Fair enough. My liking to this is that the new commanders at Apple seem to be as smart as our esteemed late Steve Jobs was. They know how to give a product something that will leave all the owners of previous iPhone versions desperately wanting to upgrade. See, this tech business is not only about providing good hardware, its also about making people want it no matter what. Hence I see the argument that this is not perfectly secure. But the brilliance lies in selling it in the way that only Apple can sell it. Ever heard the story of the salesman who sold ice to an Eskimo? That's business for you.

You don't think that the engineers at Apple would already have argued exactly as we are arguing now about the merits? Those people know exactly what their product can and can not do. But then, no one has to know that right? (Except us of course). I prefer to call it natural selection, you never know how many iSheep will die of hunger after spending all they have on the newest iPhone. Darwinism at its finest.


RE: yup
By Tony Swash on 9/23/13, Rating: -1
RE: yup
By CyCl0n3 on 9/23/2013 5:10:19 PM , Rating: 5
So Tony here is your post about the total secure and reliable Fingerprint-Scanner:
quote:
In the Authentec/Apple patent a fingertip is imaged via a different technique: Radiofrequency scanning. Skin and flesh, thanks to the cocktail of chemicals they contain, have their own electrical signature--meaning a human body can in fact block a radio signal of the right frequency, while other frequencies sail right through us more or less unaffected. The sensor in the new patent makes use of this fact by sending out very precise radio signals over a very short range and detecting the signals that have been affected by the bumps and gaps in a human fingertip. Basically the tiny ridges of flesh in a fingerprint affect the electrical signals coming from the sensor array in a measurable way, allowing the device to calculate the position and alignment of all the whorls and loops.

The advantage of this system is that you couldn't fool it with an image of a fingerprint or a latex cast of a fingerprint because the RF signals from the sensor have to interact with a material that has a flesh-like radio response in order to register the print. It's suggested that the sensor can also detect live tissue beyond the simple skin of a fingerprint, which removes the one scary scenario whereby a determined thief would "steal" the finger in question.

Offering total security via reliable fingerprint technology built right in is a big deal for corporate and government IT. I expect this will make the iPhone 5S the default phone for corporate customers.


And again you posted total BS, congrats.
I wonder how you´re gonna twist this again.


RE: yup
By retrospooty on 9/23/2013 6:34:39 PM , Rating: 4
Thank you... I was going to go dig that up for Tony LOL. I specifically was going for thios post.

by Tony Swash: "The advantage of this system is that you couldn't fool it with an image of a fingerprint or a latex cast of a fingerprint because the RF signals from the sensor have to interact with a material that has a flesh-like radio response in order to register the print."

More proof that Tony lives in an Apple fantasy camp...


RE: yup
By Cheesew1z69 on 9/23/2013 7:19:54 PM , Rating: 2
And then he STILL defends it... LOL


RE: yup
By ritualm on 9/23/2013 5:39:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The problem is that nothing is full proof

For a second I thought it was a DT blog post.

Cute how you say that first, and then claim that
quote:
What is required is to increase security and increase ease of use. That's difficult but Apple has done it with Touch ID combined with the new Phone Activation Lock feature.

Wait. You just essentially admitted that improving security without compromising convenience is impossible, yet you claim how Apple accomplished that with Touch ID.
quote:
how using Touch ID to unlock the phone is so much simpler and easier than entering a passcode every time

What passcode?

All I need to do to unlock my iPhone 4S is slide-to-unlock. I don't need a 4-digit passcode that I'm more than likely to forget in a few weeks. Use a finger to unlock and authorize purchases? Seriously?

You're advocating using the least secure authentication method (short of storing passwords in plaintext) to unlock your latest and greatest smartphone. That's worse than having no locking security mechanism in the first place.

All a criminal needs to do is stalk you for about an hour as to collect all the fingerprints you leave behind. Put a gun at your forehead and threaten to pull the trigger if you don't swipe your about-to-be-stolen iPhone 5S with your fingers. Being the deluded Apple sheep you are, you'll do what he demands. Then he pulls the trigger anyways because he's got what he wants. He won't care that you're dead, because he's got the vital access code he needs to do things under your credentials.

It's a lot more likely than you'd think.

Oh and by the way, the average response time of police coming to investigate a crime is about 10-15 minutes, and the police do not have an obligation to protect you. What are you going to trust more? Apple's Touch ID, or a concealed carry?

Your shipment of fail has arrived.


RE: yup
By web2dot0 on 9/24/2013 12:53:55 AM , Rating: 2
If a criminal waits for you for ONE HOUR prior to stealing your phone .... they deserve your phone. I've never heard of a thief in first world country that will go to that kinda of length.
It's not really a revenue generating model looking strictly at the volume basis.

Do you honestly think 4-PIN passcode is more secure than TouchID? With passcode, all you need is a software to wipe your phone. With TouchID, you still need to lift fingerprints, and all the hassle. A common thief would not go through those lengths.

It's a whole lot more secure than no passcode or with passcode.

Your argument about killing people or chopping their thumb? If they are willing to kill or chomp off your thumb .... no technology will save you. Because they'll just ask you to give them the phone/password/etc ... or they will kill you.

They won't care if you're dead.

What's concealed carry got to do with TouchID? Are you Zimmerman's friend or something?


RE: yup
By ritualm on 9/24/2013 3:06:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I've never heard of a thief in first world country that will go to that kinda of length.

What's an hour when the potential value of the data you can pilfer from it is immeasurable? You're not thinking hard enough.
quote:
Do you honestly think 4-PIN passcode is more secure than TouchID?

You can change a weak 4-number PIN at will. You can't do that with any of your bodily features.
quote:
It's a whole lot more secure than no passcode or with passcode.

No, it isn't.

Authentication by fingerprint does the following:
- regular passwords are ambiguous; they seldom directly identify the person using it. However, a fingerprint can identify the person. This is BAD.
- regular passwords can be changed at will. Fingerprints cannot without super-expensive plastic surgery (which is out of reach even for 99% of the top one percent). This is BAD.
- you have to put the victim within an inch of their lives to make them cough up a password. Fingerprints? You leave your marks on everything you touch. Your enemies don't need to coerce you to give up your prints, either. This is BAD.

Yeah right, you're not so smart.


RE: yup
By Reclaimer77 on 9/23/2013 2:04:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
News flash, there is no locking mechanism short of a private army that will hold any of your possessions safe for any length of time if someone really wanted to get to it.


Yes there is, a long un-guessable encrypted password. Sure, you *could* break it maybe, but it would take years. iTouch is defeated in a manner of hours.

quote:
This feature is rather innovative in my opinion.


In what way? It's not even the first smartphone with a fingerprint scanner!


RE: yup
By Keeir on 9/23/2013 3:15:55 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Yes there is, a long un-guessable encrypted password. Sure, you *could* break it maybe, but it would take years. iTouch is defeated in a manner of hours.


Read the steps.

#1. A clean fingerprint must be lifted
#2. A 2,400 dpi photo must be taken
#3. A 1,200 dpi mold must be made
#4. A model must be made, cured, and correctly

Apple finger print is to

#1. replace their 4 digit string with 10 numbers lock screen etc. There are only 10,000 combinations

#2. replace entering the AppleID password

I think its a decent solution to #1 and #2 quite frankly. I am not going to want to route my main bank account to it...

If you do have super senstive stuff on your phone, by gosh layer the security! Or erase the phone as soon as it goes missing. (Creating the mold will take a few hours)

I would agree its not "innovative". But will it make the user experience better? Maybe. If instead of constantly entering my 4 digit passcode, it just press home and the phone unlocks... there is value there. It will depend on the long term smoothness.


RE: yup
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/24/2013 11:50:52 AM , Rating: 2
Reclaimer's point being that instead if putting a security feature that is little more than a marketing gimmick, Apple would have been far better off to implement a REAL passphrase system rather than a stupidly simple 4-digit passcode, though I dare you to sit down and key in all 10-to-the-fourth-power combinations of those codes -- It would take MONTHS since it is kinda tough to automate that ;)


RE: yup
By spaced_ on 9/24/2013 12:04:50 PM , Rating: 2
Assuming you can enter a 4 digit key code in about 6 seconds it would take a human less than 24 hours to get into.


RE: yup
By tallcool1 on 9/24/2013 1:56:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Assuming you can enter a 4 digit key code in about 6 seconds it would take a human less than 24 hours to get into.
Well except on the iPhone it locks you out for increasing amounts of time after failed attemps from what I read, see below:

"You have 10 chances to unlock the iphone with the security lock. You have 5 chances before you start getting locked out, on the 6th chance you get locked out for a minute,on the 7th you get locked out for 5mins, on the 8th time you get locked out for 15 minutes. On the 9th try you get locked out for 60 minutes. On the 10th try you can choose what happens here in your settings you can either have the iphone wipe all the data on your iphone or you must connect the iphone to your computer to unlock the phone."

So unless you get lucky on your first few attempts then I would say your not getting into it...

Again, this is what I read with a simple google search, someone can correct this if it is wrong.


RE: yup
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/24/2013 4:51:14 PM , Rating: 2
Try it. Go ahead. I dare you.


RE: yup
By osalcido on 9/26/2013 2:04:02 PM , Rating: 1
So they had 4 digit pass code for how many years... and that was fine...

but now they try and add a fingerprint unlocker to automate it a bit and the world bitches about security


RE: yup
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/23/2013 3:11:24 PM , Rating: 5
I'm sorry, but Apple has been bragging about this sensor being a foolproof and uncrackable.

Guess the fact that it being cracked within 3 days of it going on sale once again shows Apple's absolute arrogance in that it just can't fathom the possibility that there are people out in the wild that are a lot smarter than they are.

Oopsie!


RE: yup
By Tony Swash on 9/23/13, Rating: -1
RE: yup
By 440sixpack on 9/23/2013 4:38:33 PM , Rating: 1
I had a similar thought, this approach works if you know who the target is. If someone just loses a phone on the subway and whoever finds it wants to crack it, how do you approach if you don't know who the target fingerprint is?

That seems to be the value - not so much that it is secure against a directed attack, but more so as an inconvenience against casual snooping or protection against loss.


RE: yup
By ritualm on 9/23/2013 5:52:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So to break into and/or reuse a stolen or lost iPhone protected with Touch ID and the new iOS 7 Activation Lock a miscreant must do the following...

Update the Apple remote such that it only has a single red button on its topside, and its internals replaced by a cellular radio. Link the remote directly to the phone.

Install a high-voltage capacitor in the phone's circuitry. Make its connection persistent even when the phone is completely turned off.

If the phone is compromised (stolen, lost, etc.), the user finds the remote and presses the red button. The capacitor goes to work, frying every electronic component inside.

Touch ID? Oh please. A triggered self-destruct feature works a lot better than that.


RE: yup
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/24/2013 11:45:31 AM , Rating: 1
Um, the whole fingerprint is right there on the touch sensor, including the correct finger it was taken from.

But let's face facts. The owner will be an iPhone user. Not the technically sharpest tools in the shed. It is most unlikely these will know what a remote wipe is much less how to do it. After all, technically savvy folks is not Apple's target demographic.


RE: yup
By web2dot0 on 9/24/2013 12:59:00 AM , Rating: 2
If you are the CEO of Apple, are you going introduce the product and say that it's "better than nothing"? What would you do to sell the product Mr. Know-it-all if you were Tim Cook?

The expectation going into this should be ... it is better than what it's replacing? Is it better than entering 4-PIN passcode? Better than no password?

I say yes.

Talk rationally and maybe people will listen to your arguments.


RE: yup
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/24/2013 11:58:29 AM , Rating: 2
Please explain how a gimmick that was cracked in a couple days could be more secure than a secure 4-digit passcode?

Ever try keying in 10,000 passcodes? Try it sometime and let us know how long that takes you. You can't automate it as they have to be entered through the touch screen. No matter how fast you can type them, it will take you more than 3 days to crack it.


RE: yup
By Fritzr on 9/24/2013 6:05:19 AM , Rating: 2
No smarts needed ... the fake fingerprint was invented about an hour after the first fingerprint scanner was designed. The great innovation by the hackers was finding the minimum resolution the lock will accept :D

It is a nice way to tell the phone you are ready to use it, but as security it was broken decades ago and will not allow access by authorized fingerprint reliably because of all the things that can temporarily change your finger's appearance.


RE: yup
By TakinYourPoints on 9/23/2013 6:34:15 PM , Rating: 2
The method is hilarious too, straight out of Mission Impossible with latex copies, 3D printer copies, fingerprint powdering, high resolution prints, etc etc


RE: yup
By FITCamaro on 9/24/2013 10:53:54 AM , Rating: 2
Having worked for the company Apple purchased to get this tech, yes you pretty much have to steal the users fingerprint to do this. Sure if someone is that determined, they can do it. But for the average user who just has their phone stolen, the thief isn't going to go through that trouble. Now, the only thing I'll say that supports their case, is that the owners fingerprint could very well be on the phone. Making it relatively easy to get the fingerprint and unlock the phone. But your average pick pocket isn't going to know how to properly lift a fingerprint and create the mold required for this to work.

It certainly does not just work with a piece of paper with a fingerprint printed on it at a high resolution as the beginning of the article implies.


RE: yup
By talonvor on 9/27/2013 5:32:31 PM , Rating: 2
Not true, retina scanners and really good fingerprint scanners work just fine. The best fingerprint scanners don't just look at the print itself they also look at sweat glands and other things as well. The problem is that it is impossible to incorporate one of them into a phone unless you make the phone a heck of a lot bigger.

The retina scanner would require a larger phone as well, but it would be 100% secure unless they had one of your eyes!!


RE: yup
By EricMartello on 9/27/2013 11:50:00 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So let's see, you lock your front door with a lock that can be crow-barred open right? You lock your gate with a lock that can be opened in 3 seconds with a large bolt cutter?


If you have a properly installed dead-bolt and the door itself is solid, breeching it would take a bit more than a crow bar. Personally, I'd be more concerned about someone using a bump key - which the majority of key-based locks are vulnerable to. Electronic locks that do not use physical keys can be more secure in this respect.

quote:
News flash, there is no locking mechanism short of a private army that will hold any of your possessions safe for any length of time if someone really wanted to get to it. The point is just to make it difficult enough for them not to want to try.


Except that it's relatively easy to get someone's finger print. Think about it - their prints are likely to be all over their idiotPhone's touch screen. Some powdered graphite and scotch tape is all you'd need to lift a print.

quote:
This feature is rather innovative in my opinion. It's not perfect, but its more than good enough. I am not an Apple-fanboi, but I dislike shoddy arguments. This article is just that.


There is nothing innovative about this, period. Cheapo fingerprint readers have been included as a "gimmick" feature on lots of tech products in the past - IBM Thinkpads come to mind.

A good pass-phrase (pass PHRASE as in multiple words, not a pass WORD as in one word) is still the best way to go for security, especially if it's combined with high-bit encryption.


RE: yup
By Piiman on 10/5/2013 12:50:41 PM , Rating: 2
"I dislike shoddy arguments"
Yet you used one in your post. What does a bolt cutter have to do with locking or unlocking a phone? NOTHING.

So to start with you should talk about PHONES! If you want it secure put a password on it and no bolt cutter or crowbar can open it.


RE: yup
By superstition on 9/23/2013 2:03:31 PM , Rating: 1
You should write a book. Maybe those people can be saved by your brilliance.


RE: yup
By Motoman on 9/23/2013 2:07:05 PM , Rating: 2
...that would be predicated on whether or not they could read...or be cognitively capable of rationally processing such information.


RE: yup
By superstition on 9/23/2013 2:09:19 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, I'm sure. All those people are able to afford their precious Crapple stuff because of food stamps and welfare.

Or, really, the conspiracy... but we won't talk about that.


RE: yup
By cochy on 9/23/2013 2:26:58 PM , Rating: 2
Sensationalist journalism strikes yet again.

"useless"? How is this feature anywhere close to useless? How many high resolutions copies of my finger prints exist out in the wild for some would-be iPhone thief to acquire? Probably zero.

Even if this tech could be fooled 1 out of a 100,000 fingerprints that are similar, I would still use it because the odds of said iPhone thief having a similar fingerprint to mine is close to zero again.

Please do not confuse this locking mechanism as safe enough to hide data from the US government. It's not and not meant to be.


RE: yup
By spamreader1 on 9/23/2013 2:53:33 PM , Rating: 2
I have at least 30 copies of mine just from clearance verification forms. Think there is an old copy from when I registered with selective service too. Not sure where else it is available.

Have you really never had your prints taken anywhere? Wow.


RE: yup
By cochy on 9/23/2013 3:06:06 PM , Rating: 2
Not sure what a clearance verification form is but is that for governmental use? I have given my fingerprints to 3 governments. Never to any non-governmental entity.

The point still stands that these prints are not easily accessible enough to a thief to call this technology useless.


RE: yup
By Reclaimer77 on 9/23/2013 3:47:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The point still stands that these prints are not easily accessible enough to a thief to call this technology useless.


????

What do you mean not accessible enough? They are all over your phone!!


RE: yup
By spamreader1 on 9/23/2013 4:24:48 PM , Rating: 2
Yup, all they have to do is lift the prints from the phone, print it, then use it. Same problem that has plagued fingerprint scanners since thier enception.

But I mean really, your fingerprint is everywhere, unless you just happen to wear the thick latex style gloves everywhere. (Yes the thin ones leave your finger prints)

I was just saying your prints are likely already logged all over the place, government, healthcare, military registration, passports, etc. etc. and a lot of that info is easily accessible.


RE: yup
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/23/2013 3:15:11 PM , Rating: 2
You know, once you have used your fingerprint sensor, you are in fact leaving your finger print on the phone right?

Snatch the phone, lift your print from the sensor, make a copy of it and the thief has his way with your data.


RE: yup
By chagrinnin on 9/23/2013 5:54:18 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah,...but there's only so much a thief can do with your iFart app.


RE: yup
By Nortel on 9/23/2013 9:49:11 PM , Rating: 1
Perhaps you can enlighten us as to how you 'lift' this finger print from the sensor. Keep in mind the scan needs to be 2400dpi and you can't just place the iphone face down on a flatbed scanner, the result will be completely useless.

What this 'hacking' team didn't mention was how they actually got the fingerprint scanned... which was using a 2400dpi scanner, scanning the actual person's finger. COMPLETELY different vs 'lifting' prints.


RE: yup
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/24/2013 11:35:17 AM , Rating: 2
Seriously Nortel?

I usually say that the only stupid question is the one that doesn't get asked, but in your case I am going to make an exception. I can't believe you are dumb enough not to know how to lift prints using graphite/toner and tape.

Police forensics have been lifting fingerprints for decades, and the resolution is good enough that they can use it as evidence in criminal court. They would certainly pass as a 2400dpi scan.


RE: yup
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/24/2013 11:37:55 AM , Rating: 2
FYI to pass the iPhone scanner, you need only 30% accuracy.

A lifted print is perfectly able to reproduce that accuracy.


RE: yup
By ritualm on 9/23/2013 6:03:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
How many high resolutions copies of my finger prints exist out in the wild for some would-be iPhone thief to acquire?

The correct answer is non-zero. Of course, the NSA would love to have you believe it's "probably zero".


RE: yup
By rich_92 on 9/23/2013 3:07:57 PM , Rating: 2
LOL... :D


RE: yup
By Monkey's Uncle on 9/23/2013 3:12:25 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
quote: Researchers Call Tech "Plain Stupid" ...which happens to match up nicely with their customer base.


Lol. Good one. And accurate.


RE: yup
By obviouslydumbass on 9/24/2013 3:45:20 AM , Rating: 2
U dumbasses stop yapping with ur asses. The point here is they cracked the finger scan supposedly to be uncrackable.


RE: yup
By ritualm on 9/24/2013 2:54:26 PM , Rating: 2
The amazing part is, the sheeple literally fell for this one too.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-an...
quote:
“Update to iOS 7 and become waterproof” claims the ad (see below) explaining that “In an emergency, a smart-switch will shut off the phone’s power supply and corresponding components to prevent any damage to your iPhone’s delicate circuitry.”

Users who believed the advert reportedly upgraded their iPhones and dunked the devices to test the feature, only to find that they had broken the expensive gadgets.


RE: yup
By Cheesew1z69 on 9/25/2013 1:38:36 PM , Rating: 2
Just more proof that Apple users aren't a bright bunch...


RE: yup
By Motoman on 9/25/2013 1:38:43 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, and did you guys know that upgrading to iOS 7 makes your device waterproof?

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/7817785088/h6236061E/


RE: yup
By Cheesew1z69 on 9/25/2013 2:24:54 PM , Rating: 2
NO...WAY! THAT IS TRUE INNOVATION RIGHT THERE! APPLE HAS DONE IT AGAIN!


RE: yup
By palmira_friend on 9/25/2013 3:35:35 PM , Rating: 1
my parents inlaw just got a 2013 Audi TT Convertible by working part time off of a computer. additional info....>........... http://fave.co/18pfsID


RE: yup
By osalcido on 9/26/2013 2:07:08 PM , Rating: 2
Why is a trolling insult rated +5?


RE: yup
By Argon18 on 9/27/2013 4:52:21 PM , Rating: 2
It's the DailyTech Distortion Field. It fools people into believing that all Microsoft products are good, and all Apple products are bad.

Meanwhile in the real world, Microsoft products are crashy virusy bug-riddled garbage. But sssshhhhhh don't speak the truth in here, or the Worshipers of Redmond will vote you down.


RE: yup
By Argon18 on 9/27/2013 4:42:10 PM , Rating: 2
Don't you mean the Microsoft customer base? Apple's customers are clueless hipsters. But Microsoft's customers are certain retards.


"So, I think the same thing of the music industry. They can't say that they're losing money, you know what I'm saying. They just probably don't have the same surplus that they had." -- Wu-Tang Clan founder RZA














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki