meridian180 wrote: »
This video is misleading.
Assuming that the screen for setting up a second finger is the same as the first...
1. Notice he doesn't try the middle (unlocking) finger FIRST, to show that it CANNOT unlock the phone by itself.
2. Thus, the film he puts on his finger could be anything, because the middle finger could already be set up to unlock. The phone unlocks because it might already be set up.
And that doesn't even address if it's possible to get a complete enough print on a phone surface to photograph at the 2400dpi. Doubtful.
Way too much NOT shown in this clip.
The flaws are in steps 2 and 3. First off, step 2 takes a ton of work and maybe you screw it up. Then, more importantly, WTF leaves their phone behind when they go to the restroom? Personally, I like to put my wallet, car keys, AND phone on the bar and leave them behind just to demonstrate my faith in humanity,
Heck, I go to the bathroom to use my phone, because apparently it's rude to use it in front of other people. Lol.
I think the concern is not so much about the phone as the data on it and the ability to spend money with the phone (if there's a wallet account linked to it). My phone's insured with a modest deductible; I suspect that a lot of people (albeit maybe not most) with phones this expensive have some form of insurance cover. But the insurance doesn't protect you against data or identity theft. This is especially a worry for people who are using their phone for corporate stuff.
I shouldn't act like this is not a security issue, others have said this, if you have reason to believe your phone was stolen, do a remote wipe. But consider this kind of theft takes time, even if a good print can be found on the phone itself (a screen protector probably solves this); take it to someone who knows how to do this and have the tools, lift a print, scan it, clean it up, print it etc. Meanwhile, find my iPhone (if its set up) can pinpoint the device the whole time. And the touch id "reset" is 48 hours right? So if its a random iPhone, its probably not easy to crack.
ramrod wrote: »
Honestly? Do you live in a bubble? WTF? Just because you're fine with not using gloves in the winter doesn't mean the rest of us are. The overwhelming population in North America alone (forget the rest of the world for a second) wears gloves in the winter.
And YES there are gloves out there that work with TOUCHSREENS (not just iPhones), but these gloves don't work with the Touch ID. That's what the discussion is. Are you so bent on wanting everyone to love the Touch ID that you could not see this point? One more time now, the point of mentioning gloves was to point out they do not work with the TOUCH ID. Can't believe I had to actually point this out. Dang!
Thanks for the explanation. I had been thinking that the sensor could literally see physical features under the outer layer of skin, making it impossible to fake simply by using a copy of the external fingerprint. But if that "sub-dermal" scanning is, as you say, merely confirming life itself, then there really isn't much that is special about this sensor at all, other than it's high resolution.
Just go somewhere and relax, you rude zealot! I'm not going anywhere, and while I'm an Apple fan, I'm not going to shut up when they make the occasional mistake.
What is the mistake?
I don't even remember what pooping was like before smartphones.
I do think it could be planned better than that. If I wanted to gain access to someone's email, Facebook or buy things on iTunes, etc. here's what could be done - would be easy for a work colleague/spouse/etc.:
1. Get the fingerprint (I'm guessing it's going to be the thumb for 90% of people) from a glass or something else.
2. Prepare the fake print (taking all the time you need)
You can't take "all the time you need" if the phone goes 48 hours without being unlocked, the password kicks in. Nevermind the fact the owner can always do a remote wipe as well.
But it only works on THE guy nipple? So what is your point?
Me thinks you know nothing about a new Find My Phone feature in iOS 7.
I think that it is curious that there is not more detail in the video, why they did not use a third party person to test the hacked fingerprint and why they needed to have the fingerprint on a translucent backing - stuck to a real finger. I think we need more proof. If they did this as they have depicted, it re-enforces that this can not be ultimate security for iPhone users.
If they scammed us by a bogus video to take the prize money through a lie - well I think someone at Apple may want to mail some CCC fingers to the lab for further testing...
Finally, what kind of idiot would post his fingerprint for the world to see, record, trace, use....?
This test is not accurate.
The sensor also senses for live tissue and scans sub-epidermal layer. If you use your finger with the high-resolution impression of your own fingerprint on a film (which is kind of weird because you might as well just use your finger) it is going to open alright. But if you use someone else's fingerprint, first of all it won't open because there is no live human tissue. If you place your finger on the back of the film, it will scan sub-epidermal layer as well, which will result in an incorrect scan.
"It's not like Apple ever claimed touch id would work with gloves", no but they DO claim that it is highly secure, which now seems to be uncertain at best, and untrue at worst.
So you can crack it now?
Are you really in any sort of position to be pulling this (perpetually meaningless) card?
Reading his posts all I can say is yet another pimpled face Android teenager zealot joining AI. They're so full of THAT level of intelligence. :sigh:
Then why they didn't do that in the video? Why did they use glass? Are you assuming too much?