Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep. I got into a little argument with my brother over this last week, as he is a "I don't care, I have nothing to hide."
I find that convenience is a perfectly acceptable reason to surrender personal safety/privacy. I'm not saying I personally agree, I'm saying I can respect it.
Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones
31–40 of 190 posts
Re: Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones
#32I have to wonder what sort of technical measures could be implemented to make biometric systems as legally secure as passwords while still retaining something like the same convenience. The first thing that comes to mind for me is the Apple patent on recognizing a fingerprint anywhere on the phone's surface, and using that in combination with Android-style lock screen patterns. A lock screen pattern isn't nearly as s…
While I'm all for the idea that sometimes you have to make do with what tools you have available, why are we looking for technical solutions to a legal (or perhaps even philosophical) problem? Philosophically and legally I am firmly convinced that we should treat information, and therefore data, as an extension of consciousness. Information is only meaningful because we have the conscious capacity to interpret it; di…
Re: Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones
#33Just another reason to forgo the convenience of biometrics in favor of a password/phrase that exists only in your mind. At least for now, that's something you can't be compelled to produce. Really though, this descent into a police state is such a pathetic outcome for this country. Dangerous, scary, and tragic, but also... pathetic. This is what happens when a sizeable majority don't even participate in the electoral…
Just so I'm clear, I'm saying I find this interesting because in many cases we are talking about the same people who were alive in 1989. In the USA you can say "Oh, that generation believed in those things, but those currently alive don't believe in these things." (I don't agree with that statement, but you could make that argument.) Whereas in Poland, it's in many cases the same people who fought for a more open system who are now tolerating the drift towards a more authoritarian system.
To me, the story isn't about "overwhelmingly mindless" voters, its about voters who are angry with the failure of the system. That is, they are mindful of how the system has failed. They may not know what the answer is, but they are angry, and they are willing to elect politicians who seem to mirror their anger. It might be a bad strategy to vote for someone simply because they appear to reflect your anger, but I think I can understand the motivation, and it is not quite the same as being mindless.
Re: Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones
#34This is why my unlock is not tied to biometrics. Once I realized the government can compel you to unlock your phone without a warrant using your fingerprint it became a much less compelling feature. The same for facial recognition.
Re: Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones
#35This is why my unlock is not tied to biometrics. Once I realized the government can compel you to unlock your phone without a warrant using your fingerprint it became a much less compelling feature. The same for facial recognition.
Do you travel ? In much if not all of Europe not giving your password, even to a random search when passing through (not entering the country), is a crime. Therefore legal advice is to provide custom agents and other police with access to any device upon request and then.
Re: Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Biometrics could be used as a username, but should not be used as a password...
Exactly. It is a form of identification not authentication.
They authenticate who you are, they aren't trivial to fake. However, they shouldn't authorise access to a device on their own. Your fingerprint works as a somewhat more secure, medium term swipe-to-unlock for your phone.
Re: Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones
#37Just another reason to forgo the convenience of biometrics in favor of a password/phrase that exists only in your mind. At least for now, that's something you can't be compelled to produce. Really though, this descent into a police state is such a pathetic outcome for this country. Dangerous, scary, and tragic, but also... pathetic. This is what happens when a sizeable majority don't even participate in the electoral…
Re: Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones
#38I have to wonder what sort of technical measures could be implemented to make biometric systems as legally secure as passwords while still retaining something like the same convenience. The first thing that comes to mind for me is the Apple patent on recognizing a fingerprint anywhere on the phone's surface, and using that in combination with Android-style lock screen patterns. A lock screen pattern isn't nearly as s…
It has to be speech, since speech is protected. How about 'phrase of the day' to be spoken in conjunction with swipe? [p.s. this should be relatively trivial to roll out in a patch by Apple.]
There may be 4th and 5th amendment arguments, too
Re: Feds Walk into a Building and Demand Everyone's Fingerprints to Open Phones
#39This is why my unlock is not tied to biometrics. Once I realized the government can compel you to unlock your phone without a warrant using your fingerprint it became a much less compelling feature. The same for facial recognition.
Do you travel ? In much if not all of Europe not giving your password, even to a random search when passing through (not entering the country), is a crime. Therefore legal advice is to provide custom agents and other police with access to any device upon request and then.
I do not carry a phone though.