Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Child uses sleeping mom's thumbprint to buy $250 worth of Pokémon toys

cnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 141 posts

Re: Child uses sleeping mom's thumbprint to buy $250 worth of Pokémon toys

#11

Post by Waterluvian »

saosebastiao wrote: post #7

I get relatively annoyed about the facile pedantry of this argument, but this is exactly the poster case for it, so here goes: fingerprints are usernames, not passwords.

I disagree. Fingerprints are privacy locks, not security locks.

The lock in your bathroom isn't meant to secure the bathroom. It's just a way to ensure that people get the message, "please don't enter".

A fingerprint on a phone is a way of saying the same thing. This phone isn't meant for common use, please don't enter.

Re: Child uses sleeping mom's thumbprint to buy $250 worth of Pokémon toys

#13

Post by icebraining »

Waterluvian wrote: post #6
dexwiz wrote: post #4

So is the 21st century version of stealing cash from your mom's purse?

Yup. In my opinion, this isn't a problem that needs solving. I bet with thumbprint security, money is more secure from house hooligans than it was when held in a wallet.

Maybe, but on the other hand, most people don't keep $250 in their wallets. Having an extra verification mechanism for expensive purchases seems appropriate.

Re: Child uses sleeping mom's thumbprint to buy $250 worth of Pokémon toys

#14

Post by dvdhnt »

Waterluvian wrote: post #9
cosmie wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The mom? I have a small child that's been coming up to me with my phone and trying to nonchalantly guide my finger to unlock it since she was 4. She's never done it in my sleep (that I know of), but I don't for a second doubt she'd be able to do it if she was motivated to.

As an upcoming parent, these are the things that scare me. Where my kids start exhibiting what look disturbingly like addictive behaviours. Is this just how kids naturally are, or are screens just so compelling? I remember loving the TV as a kid but recall that somehow, magically, my parents kept me off it outside TV hours without use of a password. I need to figure out that secret before its too late!

Parent here, of a toddler and a 1st grader, and based on my experience it's all about context. For example, if any of the following are true, the TV exists: TV is on or the children are inside and sedentary. Conversely, from the children's perspective, they tend to forget the TV exists or is an option if otherwise preoccupied indoors by activities like painting, reading, playing pretend, etc., or are in fact outdoors.

TL;DR - If kids can't see it, it doesn't exist.

Re: Child uses sleeping mom's thumbprint to buy $250 worth of Pokémon toys

#16

Post by Waterluvian »

icebraining wrote: post #13
Waterluvian wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. In my opinion, this isn't a problem that needs solving. I bet with thumbprint security, money is more secure from house hooligans than it was when held in a wallet.

Maybe, but on the other hand, most people don't keep $250 in their wallets. Having an extra verification mechanism for expensive purchases seems appropriate.

Depends how likely this scenario is. Adding security to a high risk, low occurence event can be seen as wasteful.

Also before this technology, people kept credit cards in their wallet, which suffered the same fate from house hooligans. And before credit, people did keep $250 in their wallet.

Re: Child uses sleeping mom's thumbprint to buy $250 worth of Pokémon toys

#17

Post by sosodaft »

sbuttgereit wrote: post #8
aaron695 wrote: post #2

"used her mother's thumb to unlock a phone and open the Amazon app as mom napped on the couch" Or she made it up.....

This is the problem with "news" stories like this... and why I hate them. We would have no way of knowing if this happened or not. It's plausible, but plausible isn't the same as "it happened". One could say at best its value is as a cautionary tale to other parents, but I'm willing to bet that if you're a parent you've probably seen the potential for this sort of thing develop in your child already... of course that…

Relevant (a statistical look at internet stories): http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/12/12/might-people-on-the-int...

(Autoplay is the scourge of the internet and sites that autoplay audio or video should be treated the same as, say, sites that use the blink tag)

Re: Child uses sleeping mom's thumbprint to buy $250 worth of Pokémon toys

#18

Post by yellowapple »

Waterluvian wrote: post #11
saosebastiao wrote: post #7

I get relatively annoyed about the facile pedantry of this argument, but this is exactly the poster case for it, so here goes: fingerprints are usernames, not passwords.

I disagree. Fingerprints are privacy locks, not security locks. The lock in your bathroom isn't meant to secure the bathroom. It's just a way to ensure that people get the message, "please don't enter". A fingerprint on a phone is a way of saying the same thing. This phone isn't meant for common use, please don't enter.

To expand on your analogy: a username says pretty much the same thing, except instead of a locked door, you have one of those "Do Not Disturb" signs on your door handle.

Re: Child uses sleeping mom's thumbprint to buy $250 worth of Pokémon toys

#19

Post by Waterluvian »

dvdhnt wrote: post #14
Waterluvian wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an upcoming parent, these are the things that scare me. Where my kids start exhibiting what look disturbingly like addictive behaviours. Is this just how kids naturally are, or are screens just so compelling? I remember loving the TV as a kid but recall that somehow, magically, my parents kept me off it outside TV hours without use of a password. I need to figure out that secret before its too late!

Parent here, of a toddler and a 1st grader, and based on my experience it's all about context. For example, if any of the following are true, the TV exists: TV is on or the children are inside and sedentary. Conversely, from the children's perspective, they tend to forget the TV exists or is an option if otherwise preoccupied indoors by activities like painting, reading, playing pretend, etc., or are in fact outdoors…

That seems very intuitive. I wonder how it translates to mobile devices. I suspect the same applies, so long as I apply the same discipline to providing access to the tablet. If they're inside and sedentary, they'll want it. If it's not tablet time, keep them busy.
Post reply on HN