Apple's US-based chip development expanding in Florida, could be related to fingerprint tech

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Apple's domestic development of custom chips continues to grow, as a new job listing references a mysterious "Melbourne Design Center" in Florida, likely connected to the company's interest in fingerprint scanning technology.

Fingerprint
AuthenTec's U.are.U 5160 Fingerprint Reader. The company, bought by Apple last year, is based in Florida.


The newly available position for a Software Engineer in Melbourne, Fla., was spotted by AppleInsider on Monday. It seeks a candidate who will work on software called "LabTool" that is used for sensor integrated circuits developed at Apple's "Melbourne Design Center."

Apple's new Melbourne Design Center may be connected to its purchase of AuthenTec, maker of fingerprint scanning technology.The city of Melbourne is located on Florida's Space Coast, named for being located near the Kennedy Space Center where NASA launched Space Shuttles until the program's retirement in 2011. The presence of NASA and various U.S. military installations has led to a number of high-tech jobs in the region.

The job listing gives no indication as to exactly what type of integrated circuits the software engineer might work on. But it's possible that the position is related to Apple's acquisition of AuthenTec, a Melbourne-based company that was purchased for $356 million last year.

There are no other job listings on Apple's site located in Melbourne, further suggesting the new hire would be a part of AuthenTec's existing operations on the Space Coast.

Apple's purchase of AuthenTec is believed to have been driven by its custom fingerprint sensor technology. That's fueled speculation that Apple could include an integrated fingerprint scanner in a future iPhone, potentially as soon as this year.

AuthenTec


Analyst Ming-chi Kuo of KGI securities, who has a strong track record in predicting Apple's future product plans, first reported in January that Apple plans to launch a so-called "iPhone 5S" this year with a fingerprint sensor featuring AuthenTec's technology. According to Kuo, the sensor will be located under the home button on the handset, and it will allow users to bypass password entry and potentially authenticate e-wallet transactions.

Apple's new Software Engineer vacancy in Melbourne seeks a candidate that will write low-level control firmware for "sensor ICs" built at the Melbourne Design Center. These "sensor functions" will include array control, gain control, calibration and security.

Qualified candidates for the newly available job must have a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering, computer engineering or computer science.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 52


    DO NOT WANT THIS FINGERPRINTING IN APPLE iDevices NOR MACS!


     


    What I DO want is Push-To-Talk Nextel/iDEN Direct Connect style with a dedicated yet programmable button.  I NEVER used a finger scanner on a work laptop I had and never would.  Fingerprinting is for criminals not end users!

  • Reply 2 of 52
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    .
  • Reply 2 of 52
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Fingerprinting is for criminals not end users!

    There have been countless people identified by their finger and foot prints that were done. Tragedies do happen and yet you would deny all those families closure by not being able to know if there loved one(s) were properly identified. Shame on you! :no:
  • Reply 4 of 52
    sockrolidsockrolid Posts: 2,786member


    Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post


    Fingerprinting is for criminals not end users!



     


    So how about a tongue print sensor instead?


    Your tongue print is just as unique as your fingerprints, but the FBI doesn't have a tongue print database.


    Great for paranoids such as yourself.


     


    And lick-to-unlock would drastically cut back on sharing iOS devices, now wouldn't it?


    Not sure I'd like to handle an iPhone whose owner just licked it.


    Could boost iPhone sales.  Less sharing.

  • Reply 5 of 52
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 42,831member


    Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

    So how about a tongue print sensor instead?


    Your tongue print is just as unique as your fingerprints, but the FBI doesn't have a tongue print database.



     


    Have the front-facing camera scan your ear. No two ears are the same.

  • Reply 6 of 52
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member
    Seems a bit late if the tech is already slated for the iPhone 5s.
  • Reply 7 of 52
    eccenteccent Posts: 4member
    I went to Disneyworld last weekend. They fingerprint everyone in order to enter.
  • Reply 8 of 52
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 42,831member


    Originally Posted by Eccent View Post

    I went to Disneyworld last weekend. They fingerprint everyone in order to enter.


     


    Yet another reason I won't be going to Disney[location].

  • Reply 9 of 52
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Eccent View Post



    I went to Disneyworld last weekend. They fingerprint everyone in order to enter.


     


    It isn't actually a fingerprint scan. It scans the whole finger and analyses the geometry of the finger e.g. size, shape, etc.


     


    Quote: http://allears.net/pl/fingerscan.htm






    The admission system has nothing to do with your fingerprints. It scans your finger and uses a geometric formula to come up with a number that will identify your fingers. The calculated number is apparently something that is not totally unique, but is statistically significant in identifying you.


     


    The data on the scans is kept independent of any other system and will be purged 30 days after the ticket expires or when the computer determines that it is fully used up.


     



    Does everyone that has one of those passes have to use the finger scan system?


     


    Yes except for children. If you personally prefer not using the finger scanners, a photo ID can always override the use of biometrics. Just present the gate CM a photo ID and be admitted without using the scanner. Otherwise, you will have to use the finger scanners to get in.






     

  • Reply 10 of 52
    kdarlingkdarling Posts: 1,640member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post


    DO NOT WANT THIS FINGERPRINTING IN APPLE iDevices NOR MACS!



     


    It's okay to not want it, but why not?


     


    The match info would almost certainly only be stored in the device itself.  It's not like it's going to send your fingerprints to the FBI along with all your porn website searches.  No need.  Apple iTunes probably already has your name, after all.


     


    Is it just the idea of fingerprints that worries you?  (Obviously you were never in the military or applied as a teacher, etc if you haven't been fingerprinted.)  


     


    Some sensors look at the pattern of blood vessels under your finger skin, instead.  Would that be better?


     


    On the good side of things, a fingerprint login would be pretty good proof that you were not at a murder scene, or the user who surfed child pron. On the bad side of things, it might be proof that you were!

  • Reply 11 of 52
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    DO NOT WANT THIS FINGERPRINTING IN APPLE iDevices NOR MACS!

    What I DO want is Push-To-Talk Nextel/iDEN Direct Connect style with a dedicated yet programmable button.  I NEVER used a finger scanner on a work laptop I had and never would.  Fingerprinting is for criminals not end users!

    No problem. Just don't use it.

    Security measures are always optional. If you don't care about security, turn off all the security features and go merrily on your way.
  • Reply 12 of 52
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by KDarling View Post


    Some sensors look at the pattern of blood vessels under your finger skin, instead.  Would that be better?


     


     



    Biometrics are better because presumably they can tell if it is a real living hand print where as finger prints can be faked with plastic replica or gruesomely, a severed digit.

  • Reply 13 of 52
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    mstone wrote: »
    Biometrics are better because presumably they can tell if it is a real living hand print where as finger prints can be faked with plastic replica or gruesomely, a severed digit.

    The biometric I prefer for security is the one that comes from a specific series of synaptic responses in the gray matter between my ears which means I can't be unconscious or dead when applied.
  • Reply 14 of 52
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    The biometric I prefer for security is the one that comes from a specific series of synaptic responses in the gray matter between my ears which means I can't be unconscious or dead when applied.


    We can waterboard that password out of you. image

  • Reply 15 of 52
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    mstone wrote: »
    We can waterboard that password out of you. :lol:

    Can we at least start with sodium pentothal?
  • Reply 16 of 52
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    Biometrics are better because presumably they can tell if it is a real living hand print where as finger prints can be faked with plastic replica or gruesomely, a severed digit.



     


    The tech that Apple bought recently apparently gets around this and apparently *can* tell if the finger is living flesh or not, but we'll have to see their implementation to see if that's actually true.  Companies in this area claim all kinds of things that later turn out not to be true, because the facts tend to argue against their claims.  


     


    For instance a fingerprint is hugely *less* unique than a DNA profile and a DNA profile is still not much more than a 90% match most of the time.  The illusion that these kind of identifiers are a "lock" for security purposes, is something the security firms like to push but it isn't really true.  In any sufficiently large city, there are multiple persons with the same fingerprints or at least close enough to be impossible to tell apart.  

  • Reply 17 of 52
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 42,831member


    Know what I'd like? I'd like a security system that lies to you.


     


    I'd like a security system where you put in your password correctly, it comes back "no", and then you put it in again and it comes back "yes".


     


    The fake failure is PART of the security. You have to get it right twice.

  • Reply 18 of 52
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Know what I'd like? I'd like a security system that lies to you.


     


    I'd like a security system where you put in your password correctly, it comes back "no", and then you put it in again and it comes back "yes".


     


    The fake failure is PART of the security. You have to get it right twice.



    That makes no sense at all. You can add additional data points easily which won't confuse or annoy the user. For example banks may ask a series of questions such as your first school, or recent past address, in order to further verify you if you are logging in from a machine without a cookie or a known IP address.

  • Reply 19 of 52
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 42,831member


    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

    That makes no sense at all.


     


    Of course not¡ image

  • Reply 20 of 52
    macbook promacbook pro Posts: 1,605member
    Know what I'd like? I'd like a security system that lies to you.

    I'd like a security system where you put in your password correctly, it comes back "no", and then you put it in again and it comes back "yes".

    The fake failure is PART of the security. You have to get it right twice.

    Bad idea.
Sign In or Register to comment.