Video shows 10-year-old unlocking mother's iPhone X via Face ID

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 96
    dysamoriadysamoria Posts: 1,549member
    I love seeing all the Apple fans rushing to blame the users... you know, the target audience for these devices.
    muthuk_vanalingamavon b7adm1
  • Reply 22 of 96
    jason98 said:
    What happened to Face ID not being suitable for people under the age of 13?
    What happened to common sense? Isn't an ability of your kids to unlock your phone defeats the purpose of Face ID? 
    Are you referring to the common sense of training Face ID properly, allowing it learn your face over time and that it can unlock for people who have a strong resemblance to the original face?  Also, that it is less accurate for people under the age of 13?  Yeah, what happened to that?
    radarthekat
  • Reply 23 of 96
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 3,164member
    What happened to Face ID not being suitable for people under the age of 13?
    Well, when they said it wasn’t suitable for people under the age of 13, I thought they meant that it would fail to allow youngsters to access the phone, even if it was their phone. 

    What I didn’t realise is that it would allow the kid in if he had a passing resemblance to his mum. 

    That needs sorting before kids start buying up a Pokemon points or whatever they do that passes for exercise these days. 

    A bit more from the Wired article:

    At WIRED's suggestion, Malik asked his wife to re-register her face to see what would happen. After Sherwani freshly programmed her face into the phone, it no longer allowed Ammar access. To further test it, Sherwani tried registering her face again a few hours later, to replicate the indoor, nighttime lighting conditions in which she first set up her iPhone X. The problem returned; Ammar unlocked the phone on his third try this time. It worked again on his sixth try. At that point, Malik says, the phone's AI seemed to learn Ammar's features, and he could consistently unlock it again and again.

    As the GoogleGuy says, it looks as if doing the initial setup in low light creates a less detailed facial map that will match a close family member. 

    However, Ammar failed to unlock it on his two attempts. So I’m not sure what happened on the third to allow him in. One possibility was that the phone was unlocked between attempts. Or something else happened that caused the phone to decide he was legit. 


    edited November 2017
  • Reply 24 of 96
    dysamoria said:
    I love seeing all the Apple fans rushing to blame the users... you know, the target audience for these devices.
    Nobody is rushing to blame the users. People want to know the facts and want to know that it was a proper test. We don’t know that this was. Why should we automatically believe a mom and her kid?
    StrangeDaysmagman1979radarthekat
  • Reply 25 of 96
    Over at 9to5mac, they stated Apple chimed in with the following info:

    "Conversely, if Face ID fails to recognize you, but the match quality is higher than a certain threshold and you immediately follow the failure by entering your passcode, Face ID takes another capture and augments its enrolled Face ID data with the newly calculated mathematical representation."
    radarthekatpscooter63
  • Reply 26 of 96
    If the truth of it is that the FaceID was trained to the kids face somehow, then whatever rules are being set to adapt recognition over time must be adjusted. Apple claimed 1:1000000 false positives, there are enough videos out there to put that in question. 


    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 27 of 96
    rob53 said:
    gatorguy said:
    rob53 said:
    The only way I’ll believe any of these is if a lab dud the testing usin rigorous controls, i.e., not having both people in the room at the same time and not allowing the primary user to enter the pin code (controls like these keep second person from cheating). I’m sure this is how Apple tested it. Add different initial and subsequent lighting to the testing as well as number of owner unlocks before testing on someone else. 
    This was done three times if you go to the source article at Wired. In two of the the three resets the son gained access, and there's a very plausible explanation for why. They explain that the lighting conditions under which the initial setup is done may play a big part in whether a similar face, ie 10-year old son, will be able to unlock your phone. You should have a read.
    Looking at the video, the boy was in the room looking at the phone. This is not a controlled test. I have no idea how wide of an angle the camera uses. The only valid test is to have the two people in different rooms at all times. 
    If Face ID can be trained that way (having multiple faces in frame) to generate a match then the training is wrong.

    god forbid you use the thing in public.  
    muthuk_vanalingambadmonk
  • Reply 28 of 96
    Rayz2016 said:
    What happened to Face ID not being suitable for people under the age of 13?
    Well, when they said it wasn’t suitable for people under the age of 13, I thought they meant that it would fail to allow youngsters to access the phone, even if it was their phone. 
    Interesting, I hadn’t thought of it that way.  I took it to mean that, people under 13 don’t have enough distinctions in their faces to get the accuracy high enough to maintain some relative security.  Conversely, your under 13 year old child may also be able to fool a not thoroughly trained Face ID and unlock your iPhone, again, due to not having a face that is developed enough AND having a strong resemblance to you.
    radarthekat
  • Reply 29 of 96
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 17,822member
    rob53 said:
    gatorguy said:
    rob53 said:
    The only way I’ll believe any of these is if a lab dud the testing usin rigorous controls, i.e., not having both people in the room at the same time and not allowing the primary user to enter the pin code (controls like these keep second person from cheating). I’m sure this is how Apple tested it. Add different initial and subsequent lighting to the testing as well as number of owner unlocks before testing on someone else. 
    This was done three times if you go to the source article at Wired. In two of the the three resets the son gained access, and there's a very plausible explanation for why. They explain that the lighting conditions under which the initial setup is done may play a big part in whether a similar face, ie 10-year old son, will be able to unlock your phone. You should have a read.
    Looking at the video, the boy was in the room looking at the phone. This is not a controlled test. I have no idea how wide of an angle the camera uses. The only valid test is to have the two people in different rooms at all times. 
    ...which is what happened on the two successive resets and initializing of Face ID. One of those resulted in the son still accessing his Mom's phone afterwards and one did not. The difference between the two? One setup was done under indoor lighting (son was successful) while the other outside on a bright day (son was NOT successful)
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 30 of 96
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 17,822member

    gatorguy said:
    dewme said:
    i’d like to know how long it was from the time it was initially configured to her face. 
    Yes, and I'd also like to see whether the phone was trained to accept the son's face ahead of time. Not trying to defend or refute the claim that the video implies, but I'd like to see the experiment repeated starting at the very first initialization/training steps and proceeding to the son attempting to unlock the phone with the phone never having seen his face before. It's insufficient to reach a conclusion in this case without having any semblance of it being a controlled experiment. 
    All you had to do was read the source article. 
    What source article? This AI story doesn’t have a Wired reference link unless I’m missing it.
    Ah, you've missed my link to the source article, which I went and searched for myself before commenting. There's often "more stuff to learn" from a source article than a summation from a 3rd party which is why I look beyond one site.
     https://www.wired.com/story/10-year-old-face-id-unlocks-mothers-iphone-x/
    adm1
  • Reply 31 of 96
    SoliSoli Posts: 6,170member
    djsherly said:
    If the truth of it is that the FaceID was trained to the kids face somehow, then whatever rules are being set to adapt recognition over time must be adjusted. Apple claimed 1:1000000 false positives, there are enough videos out there to put that in question. 
    They said nothing about "1:1000000 false positives." Their statement is about a statistical average based on randomness due to the sophistication of the HW and SW. Think of it like having a 4-digit PIN. You have 10,000 possibilities, or a 1:10,000 chance, but if that PIN is '0000' or the 4-digit house number of your address, it's probably going to be cracked much sooner because someone will look for common patterns. With Face ID the common pattern is a close DNA match.

    This is also partially true for fingerprints in that the various aspects of a fingerprint are inherited. However, the actually print pattern tends to be very unique, even amongst identical twins, which is why it can be 1:50,000 and potentially be more secure than Face ID with 1:1,000,000.
    radarthekat
  • Reply 32 of 96
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,282member
    The original situation of the son being able to unlock with Face ID likely arose because Face ID had been only minimally trained on the mother.

    In later retrains by the mother, the kid knows his mother's passcode and his face is similar enough, so every time Face ID fails and he enters the passcode, it's telling Face ID to add his face to the Face ID model.

    If you give someone else your passcode, does Face ID matter any more? It seems Face ID accuracy is compromised at least a little when someone other than the trainer enters the passcode, too. If you later want to exclude people who have your passcode and who may have used it to gain entry, you should change your passcode and re-set Face ID.

    Whatever happened to the scientific method?

    Face ID training involves 2 passes. Sometime I plan to train one pass on my face and the other on my wife's. Then see what happens!
    edited November 2017 rogifan_newStrangeDaysentropysradarthekatspliff monkeypscooter63
  • Reply 33 of 96
    So the woman said this:
    "We are seeing a flood of videos on YouTube from iPhone users who have gotten their hands on the new iPhone X and are trying to trick the Face ID." 
    How do we know she’s not being paid by someone like Samsung to spread Apple FUD? Or just looking for YouTube hits?
    magman1979
  • Reply 34 of 96
    So the woman said this:
    "We are seeing a flood of videos on YouTube from iPhone users who have gotten their hands on the new iPhone X and are trying to trick the Face ID." 
    How do we know she’s not being paid by someone like Samsung to spread Apple FUD? Or just looking for YouTube hits?
    They don't look like crooks like that. They are a decent family, no one can deny this.
    radarthekat
  • Reply 35 of 96
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,282member
    So the woman said this:
    "We are seeing a flood of videos on YouTube from iPhone users who have gotten their hands on the new iPhone X and are trying to trick the Face ID." 
    How do we know she’s not being paid by someone like Samsung to spread Apple FUD? Or just looking for YouTube hits?
    WIRED needs the clickbait but don't necessarily attribute malice to what is more likely incompetence.
    pscooter63
  • Reply 36 of 96
    Soli said:
    djsherly said:
    If the truth of it is that the FaceID was trained to the kids face somehow, then whatever rules are being set to adapt recognition over time must be adjusted. Apple claimed 1:1000000 false positives, there are enough videos out there to put that in question. 
    They said nothing about "1:1000000 false positives." Their statement is about a statistical average based on randomness due to the sophistication of the HW and SW. Think of it like having a 4-digit PIN. You have 10,000 possibilities, or a 1:10,000 chance, but if that PIN is '0000' or the 4-digit house number of your address, it's probably going to be cracked much sooner because someone will look for common patterns. With Face ID the common pattern is a close DNA match.

    This is also partially true for fingerprints in that the various aspects of a fingerprint are inherited. However, the actually print pattern tends to be very unique, even amongst identical twins, which is why it can be 1:50,000 and potentially be more secure than Face ID with 1:1,000,000.
    Ok, you focused on the 1:1000000 claim, but my real assertion is that the training rules are not right if this kind of thing can happen. I would understand totally the case of identical twins but this kind of abuse case seems like an obvious one to guard against. Kids are always trying to mess with parents stuff. 
  • Reply 37 of 96
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 17,822member
    cpsro said:
    The original situation of the son being able to unlock with Face ID likely arose because Face ID had been only minimally trained on the mother.

    In later retrains by the mother, the kid knows his mother's passcode and his face is similar enough, so every time Face ID fails and he enters the passcode, it's telling Face ID to add his face to the Face ID model.

    If you give someone else your passcode, does Face ID matter any more? It seems Face ID accuracy is compromised at least a little when someone other than the trainer enters the passcode, too. If you later want to exclude people who have your passcode and who may have used it to gain entry, you should change your passcode and re-set Face ID.

    Whatever happened to the scientific method?

    Face ID training involves 2 passes. Sometime I plan to train one pass on my face and the other on my wife's. Then see what happens!
    Is that how Face ID works? Every time you enter the passcode Apple programmed the system to accept that it's the owner and takes another face scan for training and improvement? I'd not seen that mentioned before. If so that's potentially a bit problematic since Face ID only allows one face to unlock it, and Dad/Mom/The Kid has to use the owner's passcode if he/she is allowed/asked to access the phone.
    edited November 2017 muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 38 of 96
    Minor issue correctable with a firmware update. Most probably the gaze detection was disabled on that phone.
    magman1979
  • Reply 39 of 96
    SoliSoli Posts: 6,170member
    djsherly said:
    Soli said:
    djsherly said:
    If the truth of it is that the FaceID was trained to the kids face somehow, then whatever rules are being set to adapt recognition over time must be adjusted. Apple claimed 1:1000000 false positives, there are enough videos out there to put that in question. 
    They said nothing about "1:1000000 false positives." Their statement is about a statistical average based on randomness due to the sophistication of the HW and SW. Think of it like having a 4-digit PIN. You have 10,000 possibilities, or a 1:10,000 chance, but if that PIN is '0000' or the 4-digit house number of your address, it's probably going to be cracked much sooner because someone will look for common patterns. With Face ID the common pattern is a close DNA match.

    This is also partially true for fingerprints in that the various aspects of a fingerprint are inherited. However, the actually print pattern tends to be very unique, even amongst identical twins, which is why it can be 1:50,000 and potentially be more secure than Face ID with 1:1,000,000.
    Ok, you focused on the 1:1000000 claim, but my real assertion is that the training rules are not right if this kind of thing can happen. I would understand totally the case of identical twins but this kind of abuse case seems like an obvious one to guard against. Kids are always trying to mess with parents stuff. 
    What's your solution? Children are often very close to one parent's skull structure and it's not suppose to be used for children under 13yo, so what is Apple to do that they haven't stated already?

    I guess Apple could offer a Face ID+passcode option for the first week so that it will both keep her son out as well as let the device know not to record any Face ID training that doesn't accompany a passcode immediately after. And while that week of training may prevent her son from getting into iPhone X it's certainly not guaranteed.

    While I'm glad that the limits of the technology and implementation are being explored, I also don't think it's a big deal.
    radarthekat
  • Reply 40 of 96
    gatorguy said:

    gatorguy said:
    dewme said:
    i’d like to know how long it was from the time it was initially configured to her face. 
    Yes, and I'd also like to see whether the phone was trained to accept the son's face ahead of time. Not trying to defend or refute the claim that the video implies, but I'd like to see the experiment repeated starting at the very first initialization/training steps and proceeding to the son attempting to unlock the phone with the phone never having seen his face before. It's insufficient to reach a conclusion in this case without having any semblance of it being a controlled experiment. 
    All you had to do was read the source article. 
    What source article? This AI story doesn’t have a Wired reference link unless I’m missing it.
    Ah, you've missed my link to the source article, which I went and searched for myself before commenting. There's often "more stuff to learn" from a source article than a summation from a 3rd party which is why I look beyond one site.
     https://www.wired.com/story/10-year-old-face-id-unlocks-mothers-iphone-x/
    Your link didn't exist in the story published by AI. Since I'm on AI, I'm reading and commenting on the content published by AI. There's no reason for me to realize there was a third-party source article if AI didn't refer or link to it in their story (which they should IMO). Your nuts if you think I'm going to scan the comments for "GatorGuy" links to read prior to commenting on the AI story as published. Get real.
Sign In or Register to comment.