Any touchless payment system could be considered a killer feature if it were only available on iPhone "6" and later.
Touch ID was a killer feature for the 5S last year. Always has been painful tapping in those bizarre passwords I use.
And it certainly seems like I need to type them more frequently lately.
But Touch ID's real benefit is improved security, even for those who never used a passcode before.
Likewise, a touchless mobile payment system in the "6" could be a convenience + security must-have.
And both could use the (presumed) A8's Secure Enclave.
I'd be curious to see if Apple actually implements NFC, and if so, how they differentiate their implementation from others.
Touch ID is great. Vastly superior to the swipe sensors that other devices use. The real genius of Touch ID is that people actually use it.
I always read bloggers and Android backers commenting on how weak Touch ID's security level is and how it can be broken with a duped fingerprint, etc. But, that's not the point.
The real point is that less than half of all smartphones are secured, whether with a passcode or gesture. Thanks to Touch ID, more than 80% of all iPhone 5s owners secure their phones. That alone makes for a more secure ecosystem, and a vast security improvement. Even if Touch ID's functionality remains stuck in its current role (which we know from the newly released API will not be the case), it already represents a huge leap forward for the simple reason that people actually use it. A lot of these techies get so fixated on bullet points and feature checklists that they forget that if something is overly complicated or half-baked to a point that it doesn't work reliably (like with swipe sensors), people won't use it no matter how cool or robust it seems on paper.
IIRC, a passcode is required during restart because iOS' security protocol purges the encryption keys used by Touch ID from memory whenever the phone restarts. Apple also requires that the hardware identifiers on both the A7 and the Touch ID match up. The fingerprint data itself is very well secured, and no scans are kept on the phone itself.
I can understand patenting it for licensing reasons, but protecting it so that no one else can use it is greedy, and the epitome of being a patent troll.
..or just basic common business sense. Play the game or don't play at all.
I'd be curious to see if Apple actually implements NFC, and if so, how they differentiate their implementation from others.
Touch ID is great. Vastly superior to the swipe sensors that other devices use. The real genius of Touch ID is that people actually use it.
I always read bloggers and Android backers commenting on how weak Touch ID's security level is and how it can be broken with a duped fingerprint, etc. But, that's not the point.
The real point is that less than half of all smartphones are secured, whether with a passcode or gesture. Thanks to Touch ID, more than 80% of all iPhone 5s owners secure their phones. That alone makes for a more secure ecosystem, and a vast security improvement. Even if Touch ID's functionality remains stuck in its current role (which we know from the newly released API will not be the case), it already represents a huge leap forward for the simple reason that people actually use it. A lot of these techies get so fixated on bullet points and feature checklists that they forget that if something is overly complicated or half-baked to a point that it doesn't work reliably (like with swipe sensors), people won't use it no matter how cool or robust it seems on paper.
Exactly. If Apple does use NFC, it won't be just another garden-variety implementation. Not secure enough.
And yes, if you have the expertise, a day or two of free time, and access to your victim's iPhone 5S, you can build up a 3D model of someone's fingerprint and eventually unlock that 5S. But it's far easier and faster to point a gun at the victim and say "Unlock your iPhone."
?But, as you say, the real benefit of Touch ID is improving security for the great middle of the consumer bell curve. For the average consumer. The would-be techies who flame amongst themselves online have no effect on them. Maybe that's why Topolsky quit The Verge and went to Bloomberg. The techie market is only so big.
Companies patent things invented through R&D all the time. Not everything they work on in the lab gets into an actual device, but they still patent it. If you invented it, and spent money inventing it, then you need some protection even if you don't use it.
I can understand patenting it for licensing reasons, but protecting it so that no one else can use it is greedy, and the epitome of being a patent troll.
Great… One more who doesn't understand what a patent troll is. (or perhaps someone who just does;t understand what a patent is for; period?_
Bull. You spend money inventing something you have every right to patent it and charge others to use it (or prevent others from using it).
You don't have a clue what a patent troll is if you think it's the "epitome" of being a troll. Here's a hint: owning a patent and not using it doesn't make you a troll. Collecting money from patents you own (but don't use) does not make you a troll either. Even patent assertions entities that make nothing but license patents aren't trolls.
The proposed changes to the patent system to deal with trolls make no mention of the above. They talk about things like threatening companies, being vague about what devices infringe (or exactly how they infringe) or filing frivolous lawsuits to scare companies to settle. These are the actions of a troll.
Here's the definition I found.
Quote:
Enforces patents against purported infringers without itself intending to manufacture the patented product or supply the patented service.
HAHAHA! "The definition you found"?? Oooh "good job" using that internet thing.
Except Apple isn't going to use NFC at all. The focus is clearly on LE Bluetooth.
All the buzz so far would suggest you're right, but making the iP6 unique in its ability to support a NFC payment system would sure be a good way to drive sales of the new device.
I've read somewhere that NFC could be used too speed up recognizing and connecting to BLE and WiFi devices. If true, then it could certainly improve the shopping and checkout experiences involving iBeacons and WiFi.
on the other front. Use of an 'AC' friendly chip will be very nice. I'd love to move to 'n'/'ac' only in my house, and AC and a couple airport Extremes should get around all that plaster/lathe interference I have and still give 100+mbps speeds (now that I've got Cat 6 between my servers and my timeCapsule... I'm loving moving around 15-45MBytes/sec via 'n' and 'ac'... movies just play, and backups are done before I even notice them)
If 'ac' is in the '6', then one can assume the entire 2014 fleet of devices (pads, Macs, AppleTVs) will be that way. That's a good thing.
Exactly. If Apple does use NFC, it won't be just another garden-variety implementation. Not secure enough.
And yes, if you have the expertise, a day or two of free time, and access to your victim's iPhone 5S, you can build up a 3D model of someone's fingerprint and eventually unlock that 5S. But it's far easier and faster to point a gun at the victim and say "Unlock your iPhone."
?But, as you say, the real benefit of Touch ID is improving security for the great middle of the consumer bell curve. For the average consumer. The would-be techies who flame amongst themselves online have no effect on them. Maybe that's why Topolsky quit The Verge and went to Bloomberg. The techie market is only so big.
This is not much different that that saying about how the best camera is the one that you have with you. In this case, the best security is the security that you actually use.
In much the same way that consumers ignored the dismissive comments from camera reviewers, iPhone 5s owners have also ignored the hysterical headlines from self-anointed security experts and concluded that easy-to-use security is better than no security (which is often the case when a security setup is less convenient).
Holy crap! Do you mean to tell us you can't even google "apple nfc patent" ?
Typing those three little words into your web browser is too much for you to handle??
Good luck in life.
Or better yet just do a 'NFC patent' search right here on AI, but thanks for your help.
But for some reason the iPhone 5S requires you to tap in your passcode on reboots. Not sure why.
You'd think that the hardware could compare your thumbprint hash against that in the Secure Enclave as usual.
BTW, here's how Apple describes how Touch ID works, and why they require passcodes. I also forgot that Touch ID requires passcodes if you do not use it for 48 hours or Touch ID fails to recognize after 5 tries. I think this is an additional step to prevent someone from taking apart your phone and accessing your data by installing the main board onto another phone.
Quote:
How Touch ID unlocks iPhone 5s
On devices with an A7 processor, the Secure Enclave holds the cryptographic class keys for Data Protection. When a device locks, the keys for Data Protection class Complete are discarded, and files and keychain items in that class are inaccessible until the user unlocks the device by entering their passcode.
On iPhone 5s with Touch ID turned on, the keys are not discarded when the device locks; instead, they’re wrapped with a key that is given to the Touch ID subsystem. When a user attempts to unlock the device, if Touch ID recognizes the user’s fingerprint, it provides the key for unwrapping the Data Protection keys and the device is unlocked. This process provides additional protection by requiring the Data Protection and Touch ID subsystems to cooperate in order to unlock the device.
The decrypted class keys are only held in memory, so they’re lost if the device is rebooted. Additionally, as previously described, the Secure Enclave will discard the keys after 48 hours or 5 failed Touch ID recognition attempts.
on the other front. Use of an 'AC' friendly chip will be very nice. I'd love to move to 'n'/'ac' only in my house, and AC and a couple airport Extremes should get around all that plaster/lathe interference I have and still give 100+mbps speeds (now that I've got Cat 6 between my servers and my timeCapsule... I'm loving moving around 15-45MBytes/sec via 'n' and 'ac'... movies just play, and backups are done before I even notice them)
If 'ac' is in the '6', then one can assume the entire 2014 fleet of devices (pads, Macs, AppleTVs) will be that way. That's a good thing.
Yep! I'm thinking that the first 2014 iDevice that Apple will release -- will be a new AppleTV with ac, likely an A7X APU, with more RAM more Flash storage ...
Apple has said that iOS 8 will run on the A7 chips -- that means new APIs including Metal -- Console-quality games anyone?
Since the AppleTV is headless, Apple has implemented it with a specialized version of iOS -- that need not be tied to the formal release of iOS for the iPhone, iPad ...
Yep! I'm thinking that the first 2014 iDevice that Apple will release -- will be a new AppleTV with ac, likely an A7X APU, with more RAM more Flash storage ...
But there’s no such thing as an A7X. Apple wouldn’t make an entire chip just for the Apple TV. It’ll get A8 or the A7 leftovers like always.
NFC/Contactless will have 100% penetration in mobile payments. Guaranteed. Visa has put incentives in front of merchants to install contactless when they make the mandatory switch to chip-and-sign. Since the merchant has to get a new terminal anyway, it costs them almost nothing additional to get one with contactless. Even small business owners have them: they get sent the terminals involuntarily. The contactless system runs on the exact same protocols as the chip. It's completely futile to fight.
Go look at the merchants with new terminals in the US. You'll find all of them are NFC/contactless.
Obviously you don't understand the patent system! Things aren't dramatically different than from the late 1700's or early 1800's. Patents protect the inventor and drive innovation. I only bring this up because I just left The Maker Faire at The Henry Ford. The Henry Ford has a priceless collection of steam engines including the oldest known to exist on the planet.
Now you may be wondering what this collection of engines has to do with Apples patterns. Everything really because patent disputes where as intense in the day of the Steam engine as they are today. Holding a patent drives innovation because to compete you have to come up with a different solution that also works better.
As for patent trolls you need to change your attitude. Patents are property that you are free to do as you wish with. Trying to force people to give up property because they don't use it the way you want is asinine. Think about it a bit, would you accept someone walking into your home demanding that you turned over all unused items just because you don't use them at the moment.
What many see as problems with the patent system are not even patent system related, it is more a problem with the judicial system. Further with the Judicial system people involved, often juries don't understand the tech. Thus we often get rulings that make you say WTF.
I can understand patenting it for licensing reasons, but protecting it so that no one else can use it is greedy, and the epitome of being a patent troll.
Then why all the NFC patents? Why spend R&D dollars on a technology that they're not going to use at all?
Why so hung ho about NFC? Because the other guys have it? Because it’s the world standard for mobile payments (NOT!)? Who says NFC is the cat’s meow? The iHaters, if course, because Apple doesn’t have it. I don’t know if NFC is worth a plug nickel as a technology but I hope Apple isn’t including it just because the techies are enamored with it.
I can understand patenting it for licensing reasons, but protecting it so that no one else can use it is greedy, and the epitome of being a patent troll.
That definition is crap. A patent is property you can own, purchase or sell. That property gives you the right to exclusive use of the property and that has been a reality for hundreds of years now. You really need to grasp why the patent system exists and how it's existence drives innovation. The patent system isn't perfect but it does far more good than harm.
Comments
Any touchless payment system could be considered a killer feature if it were only available on iPhone "6" and later.
Touch ID was a killer feature for the 5S last year. Always has been painful tapping in those bizarre passwords I use.
And it certainly seems like I need to type them more frequently lately.
But Touch ID's real benefit is improved security, even for those who never used a passcode before.
Likewise, a touchless mobile payment system in the "6" could be a convenience + security must-have.
And both could use the (presumed) A8's Secure Enclave.
I'd be curious to see if Apple actually implements NFC, and if so, how they differentiate their implementation from others.
Touch ID is great. Vastly superior to the swipe sensors that other devices use. The real genius of Touch ID is that people actually use it.
I always read bloggers and Android backers commenting on how weak Touch ID's security level is and how it can be broken with a duped fingerprint, etc. But, that's not the point.
The real point is that less than half of all smartphones are secured, whether with a passcode or gesture. Thanks to Touch ID, more than 80% of all iPhone 5s owners secure their phones. That alone makes for a more secure ecosystem, and a vast security improvement. Even if Touch ID's functionality remains stuck in its current role (which we know from the newly released API will not be the case), it already represents a huge leap forward for the simple reason that people actually use it. A lot of these techies get so fixated on bullet points and feature checklists that they forget that if something is overly complicated or half-baked to a point that it doesn't work reliably (like with swipe sensors), people won't use it no matter how cool or robust it seems on paper.
But for some reason the iPhone 5S requires you to tap in your passcode on reboots. Not sure why.
You'd think that the hardware could compare your thumbprint hash against that in the Secure Enclave as usual.
Read Apple's iOS security white paper, or listen to Steve Gibson's security podcasts on iOS (episodes 446 through 448). The level of security that Apple builds into iOS is impressive and seems well thought out.
IIRC, a passcode is required during restart because iOS' security protocol purges the encryption keys used by Touch ID from memory whenever the phone restarts. Apple also requires that the hardware identifiers on both the A7 and the Touch ID match up. The fingerprint data itself is very well secured, and no scans are kept on the phone itself.
I can understand patenting it for licensing reasons, but protecting it so that no one else can use it is greedy, and the epitome of being a patent troll.
..or just basic common business sense. Play the game or don't play at all.
Then why all the NFC patents? Why spend R&D dollars on a technology that they're not going to use at all?
Can you show me where Apple is spending R&D dollars specifically on NFC?
I'd be curious to see if Apple actually implements NFC, and if so, how they differentiate their implementation from others.
Touch ID is great. Vastly superior to the swipe sensors that other devices use. The real genius of Touch ID is that people actually use it.
I always read bloggers and Android backers commenting on how weak Touch ID's security level is and how it can be broken with a duped fingerprint, etc. But, that's not the point.
The real point is that less than half of all smartphones are secured, whether with a passcode or gesture. Thanks to Touch ID, more than 80% of all iPhone 5s owners secure their phones. That alone makes for a more secure ecosystem, and a vast security improvement. Even if Touch ID's functionality remains stuck in its current role (which we know from the newly released API will not be the case), it already represents a huge leap forward for the simple reason that people actually use it. A lot of these techies get so fixated on bullet points and feature checklists that they forget that if something is overly complicated or half-baked to a point that it doesn't work reliably (like with swipe sensors), people won't use it no matter how cool or robust it seems on paper.
Exactly. If Apple does use NFC, it won't be just another garden-variety implementation. Not secure enough.
And yes, if you have the expertise, a day or two of free time, and access to your victim's iPhone 5S, you can build up a 3D model of someone's fingerprint and eventually unlock that 5S. But it's far easier and faster to point a gun at the victim and say "Unlock your iPhone."
?But, as you say, the real benefit of Touch ID is improving security for the great middle of the consumer bell curve. For the average consumer. The would-be techies who flame amongst themselves online have no effect on them. Maybe that's why Topolsky quit The Verge and went to Bloomberg. The techie market is only so big.
Companies patent things invented through R&D all the time. Not everything they work on in the lab gets into an actual device, but they still patent it. If you invented it, and spent money inventing it, then you need some protection even if you don't use it.
I can understand patenting it for licensing reasons, but protecting it so that no one else can use it is greedy, and the epitome of being a patent troll.
Great… One more who doesn't understand what a patent troll is. (or perhaps someone who just does;t understand what a patent is for; period?_
Bull. You spend money inventing something you have every right to patent it and charge others to use it (or prevent others from using it).
You don't have a clue what a patent troll is if you think it's the "epitome" of being a troll. Here's a hint: owning a patent and not using it doesn't make you a troll. Collecting money from patents you own (but don't use) does not make you a troll either. Even patent assertions entities that make nothing but license patents aren't trolls.
The proposed changes to the patent system to deal with trolls make no mention of the above. They talk about things like threatening companies, being vague about what devices infringe (or exactly how they infringe) or filing frivolous lawsuits to scare companies to settle. These are the actions of a troll.
Here's the definition I found.
HAHAHA! "The definition you found"?? Oooh "good job" using that internet thing.
Then why all the NFC patents? Why spend R&D dollars on a technology that they're not going to use at all?
Can you show me where Apple is spending R&D dollars specifically on NFC?
Holy crap! Do you mean to tell us you can't even google "apple nfc patent" ?
Typing those three little words into your web browser is too much for you to handle??
Good luck in life.
Where did you get yours? There were various definitions, the one I quoted being one of them.
I've read somewhere that NFC could be used too speed up recognizing and connecting to BLE and WiFi devices. If true, then it could certainly improve the shopping and checkout experiences involving iBeacons and WiFi.
on the other front. Use of an 'AC' friendly chip will be very nice. I'd love to move to 'n'/'ac' only in my house, and AC and a couple airport Extremes should get around all that plaster/lathe interference I have and still give 100+mbps speeds (now that I've got Cat 6 between my servers and my timeCapsule... I'm loving moving around 15-45MBytes/sec via 'n' and 'ac'... movies just play, and backups are done before I even notice them)
If 'ac' is in the '6', then one can assume the entire 2014 fleet of devices (pads, Macs, AppleTVs) will be that way. That's a good thing.
Quote:
Exactly. If Apple does use NFC, it won't be just another garden-variety implementation. Not secure enough.
And yes, if you have the expertise, a day or two of free time, and access to your victim's iPhone 5S, you can build up a 3D model of someone's fingerprint and eventually unlock that 5S. But it's far easier and faster to point a gun at the victim and say "Unlock your iPhone."
?But, as you say, the real benefit of Touch ID is improving security for the great middle of the consumer bell curve. For the average consumer. The would-be techies who flame amongst themselves online have no effect on them. Maybe that's why Topolsky quit The Verge and went to Bloomberg. The techie market is only so big.
This is not much different that that saying about how the best camera is the one that you have with you. In this case, the best security is the security that you actually use.
In much the same way that consumers ignored the dismissive comments from camera reviewers, iPhone 5s owners have also ignored the hysterical headlines from self-anointed security experts and concluded that easy-to-use security is better than no security (which is often the case when a security setup is less convenient).
Or better yet just do a 'NFC patent' search right here on AI, but thanks for your help.
But for some reason the iPhone 5S requires you to tap in your passcode on reboots. Not sure why.
You'd think that the hardware could compare your thumbprint hash against that in the Secure Enclave as usual.
BTW, here's how Apple describes how Touch ID works, and why they require passcodes. I also forgot that Touch ID requires passcodes if you do not use it for 48 hours or Touch ID fails to recognize after 5 tries. I think this is an additional step to prevent someone from taking apart your phone and accessing your data by installing the main board onto another phone.
Yep! I'm thinking that the first 2014 iDevice that Apple will release -- will be a new AppleTV with ac, likely an A7X APU, with more RAM more Flash storage ...
Apple has said that iOS 8 will run on the A7 chips -- that means new APIs including Metal -- Console-quality games anyone?
Since the AppleTV is headless, Apple has implemented it with a specialized version of iOS -- that need not be tied to the formal release of iOS for the iPhone, iPad ...
But there’s no such thing as an A7X. Apple wouldn’t make an entire chip just for the Apple TV. It’ll get A8 or the A7 leftovers like always.
NFC/Contactless will have 100% penetration in mobile payments. Guaranteed. Visa has put incentives in front of merchants to install contactless when they make the mandatory switch to chip-and-sign. Since the merchant has to get a new terminal anyway, it costs them almost nothing additional to get one with contactless. Even small business owners have them: they get sent the terminals involuntarily. The contactless system runs on the exact same protocols as the chip. It's completely futile to fight.
Go look at the merchants with new terminals in the US. You'll find all of them are NFC/contactless.
Now you may be wondering what this collection of engines has to do with Apples patterns. Everything really because patent disputes where as intense in the day of the Steam engine as they are today. Holding a patent drives innovation because to compete you have to come up with a different solution that also works better.
As for patent trolls you need to change your attitude. Patents are property that you are free to do as you wish with. Trying to force people to give up property because they don't use it the way you want is asinine. Think about it a bit, would you accept someone walking into your home demanding that you turned over all unused items just because you don't use them at the moment.
What many see as problems with the patent system are not even patent system related, it is more a problem with the judicial system. Further with the Judicial system people involved, often juries don't understand the tech. Thus we often get rulings that make you say WTF.
Then why all the NFC patents? Why spend R&D dollars on a technology that they're not going to use at all?
Why so hung ho about NFC? Because the other guys have it? Because it’s the world standard for mobile payments (NOT!)? Who says NFC is the cat’s meow? The iHaters, if course, because Apple doesn’t have it. I don’t know if NFC is worth a plug nickel as a technology but I hope Apple isn’t including it just because the techies are enamored with it.
That definition is crap. A patent is property you can own, purchase or sell. That property gives you the right to exclusive use of the property and that has been a reality for hundreds of years now. You really need to grasp why the patent system exists and how it's existence drives innovation. The patent system isn't perfect but it does far more good than harm.