btw: It’s common for the eyes to open and stay open when a person dies, if you happened to wonder whether Face ID would be more secure than Touch ID in such a situation. I’m sure many of you wondered. 😁
The IR camera might not be looking for only the light points from the flood emitter. It could also capture an IR image representing a heat map of the user's face, which has hotter areas (cheeks, for example) and cooler areas (bridge of nose). This could be used to determine whether the image represents living tissue and would be difficult to fake, especially if it has to match up against a heat image of the registered user. My face, with a high bony nose bridge, will produce a very different hashed heat map versus someone with a flatter, more fleshy nose. And very different than a dead me.
I still think it failed. Here's why. If the phone had been rebooted it was already in the "requiring PIN mode", when he first turned on the screen it would've asked for the PIN, just like with Touch ID, and just like it did when he turned on the screen for the second attempt. It's likely that multiple people handling it ahead of time triggered the initial unlock attempts, but there was still one valid attempt left before requiring the PIN, and that was Craig's first attempt on the first phone. That first attempt DID NOT WORK, hence why when he tried a second time on the first phone, it required the PIN.
So it did fail to detect his face.
That being said, it's not THAT big of a deal. Touch ID fails for me a lot. At least one or two attempts out of every, I don't know, 100? I just lift and try again.
But the point is that Face ID did fail to identify Craig on that first attempt. Is it super horrible and damning? No, but it just also doesn't look good either. That is all.
Or he simply didn't swipe from the right place to represent an attempt to go to the home screen. He might have landed a bit high with his finger before swiping up. That's what it appeared to be to my eye.
I still think it failed. Here's why. If the phone had been rebooted it was already in the "requiring PIN mode", when he first turned on the screen it would've asked for the PIN, just like with Touch ID, and just like it did when he turned on the screen for the second attempt. It's likely that multiple people handling it ahead of time triggered the initial unlock attempts, but there was still one valid attempt left before requiring the PIN, and that was Craig's first attempt on the first phone. That first attempt DID NOT WORK, hence why when he tried a second time on the first phone, it required the PIN.
So it did fail to detect his face.
That being said, it's not THAT big of a deal. Touch ID fails for me a lot. At least one or two attempts out of every, I don't know, 100? I just lift and try again.
But the point is that Face ID did fail to identify Craig on that first attempt. Is it super horrible and damning? No, but it just also doesn't look good either. That is all.
Not necessarily. The phone allows for two attempts only. If two people failed to authenticate, then Craig was already out of tries when he picked up the phone.
FaceID works as designed, I'm just not so sure the design is right.
Does this mean that every time someone walks past and glances at the phone, it tries to recognise them? This is what I was talking about last week; I'm not happy with FaceID firing all the time; it needs to be triggered by a finger.
It doesn't start scanning until you either touch the screen to wake it, or you pick it up (i.e., you move it while it's in sleep mode). At which point the system likely first runs a face detection scan to determine whether, and where, a face appears within view of the sensors. Face detection is a lot less process intensive than face recognition, and so it could loop the face detection process until it finds a face or times out (assuming there's a time out). Once a face is acquired, it would then focus its face recognition efforts on just those areas of the scene where one or more faces were detected.
Totally plausible. Its a live show, stuff happens, even in the most polished presentations. It won't harm Apple. It will if users get it and it starts failing. There will, of course, be people who will try every avenue to make it either fail or prove it can be tricked. Whilst finding security flaws is great to report for added security to be addressed, to simply say it doesn't work because you have your hair over your face, under water, and in the dark will be simply wrong... but there will be people that will do that to try and undermine the technology but as with touch ID, it will hopefully prove to be a success.
the proof will be in the pudding, that is when end users start using it to unlock. total nothing burger, in my opinion.
lots of nerves present during these big reveals, maybe the front camera rejected Craig's face due to his nervousness? haha
No one really cares what the real story was. Most of the media is just happy that something went wrong with an Apple demo. They're probably hoping this demo will somehow cause the collapse of Apple. Wall Street and the news media is hoping no one will buy an iPhone X because of some perceived Face ID failure. People are so anxious to find fault with Apple that even the smallest thing will spread across the internet like a major virus epidemic. It's best they all get it out of their systems before the iPhone X goes on sale. I believe the gaff on stage will have no effect at all on iPhone X sales if Face ID is as good as they say it is.
"Indeed, Jobs' own keynote presentations became known as 'Jobsnotes.'" Maybe in "Mirror, Mirror" where Evil Jobs does the demos. On this side, they were Stevenotes.
The article states Face id provides 2 attempts before asking for pin. Craig did it 2x then was asked for a pin after the second Time... it failed. Why it failed is something that should of been handled better by Craig during the keynote. TBH
btw: It’s common for the eyes to open and stay open when a person dies, if you happened to wonder whether Face ID would be more secure than Touch ID in such a situation. I’m sure many of you wondered. ߘt;/div>
I would think the IR camera (correlated with the position of the scanned face features) will reject a "cold" face (dead person or a mask).
I was simply thinking that the phone was restarted for one reason or another which would immediately prompt for the passcode...even if it was TouchID that would have happened.
Apple knows what happened...I seriously doubt they're going to make up a story about why it failed. In the end, it doesn't matter to most. The point is, the demo failed and thats how people and the media are going to perceive it.
I hate when people do if Steve were heres....but if he were here and was doing the demo and this happened, I think someone would have their ass handed to them. It seems like this was the stuff that drove him absolutely crazy and I can see why. Apple works so hard to make new technology work, be reliable, and very secure and then something stupid like this happens that kinda ruins it. Its bad enough that everything was leaked what we hear was on purpose and now something silly has to happen with the demo.
Hopefully, when this gets into the hands of customers it will just fall by the wayside. I'm sure there will be complaints about you have to look at the phone and then swipe. Sure, maybe that will seem like a pain in the ass at first, but eventually, just like with slide to unlock, it will just be natural and you just do it.
Well, as for the keynote presenters, I think Phil and Eddy should not return. They read from the TelePrompTer as if they’ve never seen the text before ... it’s been this way for a few Keynotes now. Phil in particular also looked bored when describing the iPhone 8 ... you could tell he just wanted to discuss the iPhone X. I’m not saying they are bad execs ... but neither convey enthusiasm. Clearly Craig, is the man for these events ... you can tell he lives and breathes Apple, and deeply understands what he’s talking about.
As for the Face ID fail ... that note on the screen was obvious at the time (I.e. PassCode required ..), I just assumed the phone had been rebooted (that’s when I usually see that message) ... in any case, people reporting it as a Fail are simply looking for something to criticise. The X is gorgeous! Will be pre-ordering as soon as my carrier lets me!
To me, Phil is smooth and never hiccups. Tim wasn't quite up to his usual self this time around. He's never what one would call a consummate presenter, but he's competent at hosting the others. I suspect this year there has been a lot more going on at Apple with the new headquarters move-in coming up, and so Tim's time has probably been stretched a bit thin. I'll bet he'll use this very busy period to make some staff additions in his own personal assistant staff. Just to keep all the balls in the air.
i agree about Craig. He's aces! Smooth, cool, and deeply knowledgeable. He owns his realm.
Tim got choked up when he heard his dead friend's voice, and his game was off from there. Unfortunate, but understandable; the guy isn't a robot.
I still think it failed. Here's why. If the phone had been rebooted it was already in the "requiring PIN mode", when he first turned on the screen it would've asked for the PIN, just like with Touch ID, and just like it did when he turned on the screen for the second attempt. It's likely that multiple people handling it ahead of time triggered the initial unlock attempts, but there was still one valid attempt left before requiring the PIN, and that was Craig's first attempt on the first phone. That first attempt DID NOT WORK, hence why when he tried a second time on the first phone, it required the PIN.
So it did fail to detect his face.
That being said, it's not THAT big of a deal. Touch ID fails for me a lot. At least one or two attempts out of every, I don't know, 100? I just lift and try again.
But the point is that Face ID did fail to identify Craig on that first attempt. Is it super horrible and damning? No, but it just also doesn't look good either. That is all.
Not necessarily. The phone allows for two attempts only. If two people failed to authenticate, then Craig was already out of tries when he picked up the phone.
FaceID works as designed, I'm just not so sure the design is right.
Does this mean that every time someone walks past and glances at the phone, it tries to recognise them? This is what I was talking about last week; I'm not happy with FaceID firing all the time; it needs to be triggered by a finger.
It doesn't start scanning until you either touch the screen to wake it, or you pick it up (i.e., you move it while it's in sleep mode). At which point the system likely first runs a face detection scan to determine whether, and where, a face appears within view of the sensors. Face detection is a lot less process intensive than face recognition, and so it could loop the face detection process until it finds a face or times out (assuming there's a time out). Once a face is acquired, it would then focus its face recognition efforts on just those areas of the scene where one or more faces were detected.
The phone didn't crash (that would be the real fail) and a passcode was asked. Actually showing that the system is secure in case it might not work. Naysayers have no clue of how complex the tech is to make FaceID work the way it does and it is brand new tech. It is an amazing feat that Apple is bringing it to the market, and it is not some laughable tech (e.g. Samsung's) that can be fooled by a printed version of your face... Let's move on please.
PS: I am more concerned about the fact that an authority or criminal can simply open your phone showing the device to you. With Touch ID they need to physically force you to put your finger. (or have the finger itself detached from your body). I think FaceID is the current solution for taking away the TouchID sensor from the front, avoiding putting it to the back (which is an ergonomic nightmare). The real secure version, will be TouchID integrated in the screen. Tech that clearly is not ready for prime time. Which also might explain why the iPhone 8 has the same A11 chip as the X, although it is not required to do any FaceID stuff (not considering the extra hardware required to do so). Which means that A11 has a much bigger role in the iPhone and future of Apple (a bit like introducing 64 bits a while ago) than FaceID itself, that we can foresee now (e.g. what will iOS12 bring to actually exploit A11 Neural engine, other than FaceID and pic taking features...).
To begin with, TouchID will not work with a severed finger as it relies on the movement of blood flow to work.
I did not know that. When did Apple make that change because it did not start out that way, instead designed (!) to detect the small electrical charge flowing thru supposed living tissue. Not saying you are incorrect but I'd love to see more about the blood-flow thing.
The phone didn't crash (that would be the real fail) and a passcode was asked. Actually showing that the system is secure in case it might not work. Naysayers have no clue of how complex the tech is to make FaceID work the way it does and it is brand new tech. It is an amazing feat that Apple is bringing it to the market, and it is not some laughable tech (e.g. Samsung's) that can be fooled by a printed version of your face... Let's move on please.
PS: I am more concerned about the fact that an authority or criminal can simply open your phone showing the device to you. With Touch ID they need to physically force you to put your finger. (or have the finger itself detached from your body). I think FaceID is the current solution for taking away the TouchID sensor from the front, avoiding putting it to the back (which is an ergonomic nightmare). The real secure version, will be TouchID integrated in the screen. Tech that clearly is not ready for prime time. Which also might explain why the iPhone 8 has the same A11 chip as the X, although it is not required to do any FaceID stuff (not considering the extra hardware required to do so). Which means that A11 has a much bigger role in the iPhone and future of Apple (a bit like introducing 64 bits a while ago) than FaceID itself, that we can foresee now (e.g. what will iOS12 bring to actually exploit A11 Neural engine, other than FaceID and pic taking features...).
To begin with, TouchID will not work with a severed finger as it relies on the movement of blood flow to work.
I did not know that. When did Apple make that change because it did not start out that way, instead designed (!) to detect the small electrical charge flowing thru supposed living tissue. Not saying you are incorrect but I'd love to see more about the blood-flow thing.
Yeah, my mistake. It isn't blood flow, it's electrical capacitance.
The phone didn't crash (that would be the real fail) and a passcode was asked. Actually showing that the system is secure in case it might not work. Naysayers have no clue of how complex the tech is to make FaceID work the way it does and it is brand new tech. It is an amazing feat that Apple is bringing it to the market, and it is not some laughable tech (e.g. Samsung's) that can be fooled by a printed version of your face... Let's move on please.
PS: I am more concerned about the fact that an authority or criminal can simply open your phone showing the device to you. With Touch ID they need to physically force you to put your finger. (or have the finger itself detached from your body). I think FaceID is the current solution for taking away the TouchID sensor from the front, avoiding putting it to the back (which is an ergonomic nightmare). The real secure version, will be TouchID integrated in the screen. Tech that clearly is not ready for prime time. Which also might explain why the iPhone 8 has the same A11 chip as the X, although it is not required to do any FaceID stuff (not considering the extra hardware required to do so). Which means that A11 has a much bigger role in the iPhone and future of Apple (a bit like introducing 64 bits a while ago) than FaceID itself, that we can foresee now (e.g. what will iOS12 bring to actually exploit A11 Neural engine, other than FaceID and pic taking features...).
To begin with, TouchID will not work with a severed finger as it relies on the movement of blood flow to work.
I did not know that. When did Apple make that change because it did not start out that way, instead designed (!) to detect the small electrical charge flowing thru supposed living tissue. Not saying you are incorrect but I'd love to see more about the blood-flow thing.
Yeah, my mistake. It isn't blood flow, it's electrical capacitance.
A lot of people seem very worried about their phones being grabbed and then FaceID being used to open it while you haven't noticed the phone has been grabbed.
I wonder if it would be possible to get more of the apps to require an id before opening. You touch the Photo app and it makes sure it's you; same with the contacts.
Stuff like the wallet app is fine, and most banking apps will require you to authenticate.
Here's any idea: if Safari detects a website with a password form on it, it does a quick face check before allowing you to proceed.
The phone didn't crash (that would be the real fail) and a passcode was asked. Actually showing that the system is secure in case it might not work. Naysayers have no clue of how complex the tech is to make FaceID work the way it does and it is brand new tech. It is an amazing feat that Apple is bringing it to the market, and it is not some laughable tech (e.g. Samsung's) that can be fooled by a printed version of your face... Let's move on please.
PS: I am more concerned about the fact that an authority or criminal can simply open your phone showing the device to you. With Touch ID they need to physically force you to put your finger. (or have the finger itself detached from your body). I think FaceID is the current solution for taking away the TouchID sensor from the front, avoiding putting it to the back (which is an ergonomic nightmare). The real secure version, will be TouchID integrated in the screen. Tech that clearly is not ready for prime time. Which also might explain why the iPhone 8 has the same A11 chip as the X, although it is not required to do any FaceID stuff (not considering the extra hardware required to do so). Which means that A11 has a much bigger role in the iPhone and future of Apple (a bit like introducing 64 bits a while ago) than FaceID itself, that we can foresee now (e.g. what will iOS12 bring to actually exploit A11 Neural engine, other than FaceID and pic taking features...).
To begin with, TouchID will not work with a severed finger as it relies on the movement of blood flow to work.
I did not know that. When did Apple make that change because it did not start out that way, instead designed (!) to detect the small electrical charge flowing thru supposed living tissue. Not saying you are incorrect but I'd love to see more about the blood-flow thing.
Yeah, my mistake. It isn't blood flow, it's electrical capacitance.
I still think it failed. Here's why. If the phone had been rebooted it was already in the "requiring PIN mode", when he first turned on the screen it would've asked for the PIN, just like with Touch ID, and just like it did when he turned on the screen for the second attempt. It's likely that multiple people handling it ahead of time triggered the initial unlock attempts, but there was still one valid attempt left before requiring the PIN, and that was Craig's first attempt on the first phone. That first attempt DID NOT WORK, hence why when he tried a second time on the first phone, it required the PIN.
So it did fail to detect his face.
That being said, it's not THAT big of a deal. Touch ID fails for me a lot. At least one or two attempts out of every, I don't know, 100? I just lift and try again.
But the point is that Face ID did fail to identify Craig on that first attempt. Is it super horrible and damning? No, but it just also doesn't look good either. That is all.
Not necessarily. The phone allows for two attempts only. If two people failed to authenticate, then Craig was already out of tries when he picked up the phone.
FaceID works as designed, I'm just not so sure the design is right.
Does this mean that every time someone walks past and glances at the phone, it tries to recognise them? This is what I was talking about last week; I'm not happy with FaceID firing all the time; it needs to be triggered by a finger.
It doesn't start scanning until you either touch the screen to wake it, or you pick it up (i.e., you move it while it's in sleep mode). At which point the system likely first runs a face detection scan to determine whether, and where, a face appears within view of the sensors. Face detection is a lot less process intensive than face recognition, and so it could loop the face detection process until it finds a face or times out (assuming there's a time out). Once a face is acquired, it would then focus its face recognition efforts on just those areas of the scene where one or more faces were detected.
That does leave open the question as to why the backup phone didn't suffer the same issue during the on-stage demo since it too would have been handled by multiple people before the intro started.
Comments
The IR camera might not be looking for only the light points from the flood emitter. It could also capture an IR image representing a heat map of the user's face, which has hotter areas (cheeks, for example) and cooler areas (bridge of nose). This could be used to determine whether the image represents living tissue and would be difficult to fake, especially if it has to match up against a heat image of the registered user. My face, with a high bony nose bridge, will produce a very different hashed heat map versus someone with a flatter, more fleshy nose. And very different than a dead me.
Or he simply didn't swipe from the right place to represent an attempt to go to the home screen. He might have landed a bit high with his finger before swiping up. That's what it appeared to be to my eye.
It doesn't start scanning until you either touch the screen to wake it, or you pick it up (i.e., you move it while it's in sleep mode). At which point the system likely first runs a face detection scan to determine whether, and where, a face appears within view of the sensors. Face detection is a lot less process intensive than face recognition, and so it could loop the face detection process until it finds a face or times out (assuming there's a time out). Once a face is acquired, it would then focus its face recognition efforts on just those areas of the scene where one or more faces were detected.
Edit: same as what Radar the Kat said.
Apple knows what happened...I seriously doubt they're going to make up a story about why it failed. In the end, it doesn't matter to most. The point is, the demo failed and thats how people and the media are going to perceive it.
I hate when people do if Steve were heres....but if he were here and was doing the demo and this happened, I think someone would have their ass handed to them. It seems like this was the stuff that drove him absolutely crazy and I can see why. Apple works so hard to make new technology work, be reliable, and very secure and then something stupid like this happens that kinda ruins it. Its bad enough that everything was leaked what we hear was on purpose and now something silly has to happen with the demo.
Hopefully, when this gets into the hands of customers it will just fall by the wayside. I'm sure there will be complaints about you have to look at the phone and then swipe. Sure, maybe that will seem like a pain in the ass at first, but eventually, just like with slide to unlock, it will just be natural and you just do it.
https://www.engadget.com/2013/09/16/why-a-disembodied-finger-cant-be-used-to-unlock-the-touch-id-se/
In any case, since it was first released, TouchID has never allowed access from a severed finger.
I wonder if it would be possible to get more of the apps to require an id before opening. You touch the Photo app and it makes sure it's you; same with the contacts.
Stuff like the wallet app is fine, and most banking apps will require you to authenticate.
Here's any idea: if Safari detects a website with a password form on it, it does a quick face check before allowing you to proceed.
To be honest, you're average thief probably doesn't know that, so if it comes to it, you're better off opening the phone and keeping the finger.