> You're conflating every fingerprint scanner with the Apple's implementation of TouchID, which is far more secure than the check-the-box-to-win-a-government-contract stuff that's been built into most laptops.
No, I'm not. TouchID is the most popular implementation, and because it's present on every iPhone (which is the most common device to be a work phone, and thus also connected to work email and work networks), and because TouchID is also insecure, thus arises the problem.
> If it's that important, use a biometric print AND a PIN.
This is not possible on the iPhone, and wouldn't solve the problem anyway: consumers are under the false impression that fingerprints are the best security available, and they become frustrated to learn that Apple has been lying to them when corporate IT tells them fingerprints actually suck and they can't use fingerprint locks (or have to use fingerprint + something else) if they also use their phone for work stuff.
> And by having a person physically press the correct finger onto your obvious fingerprint-stealing device. . .k But if someone has the power to compel you to do that, they have the power to compel you to just put your finger on your phone for them.
What? No, you don't. You're just making stuff up now. You can steal someone's fingerprint by simply having access to something they touched, and then you can duplicate it with $10 worth of office supplies.
> This is even more involved. This involves having to lift the print with a high fidelity scanner and create a latex mold of it. What are you securing on your phone where this is a concern?
Network access to a corporate environment that has millions of SSNs, credit card numbers, etc. You think that a few hours of fiddling around with a latex mold is "too much work" for this? Think again.
> Maybe if fewer services forced people into using inane and impossible-to-remember passwords and just relied on biometric authentication instead folks wouldn’t need password managers that are so easy to unlock.
You miss the point. This wouldn't solve the issue at all, and would actually worsen it. Fingerprints are inherently insecure. Using fingerprints for more accounts is, thus, more insecure.
> I don't understand how you derived THAT from this:
I "derived" it from years of experience working as a cybersecurity consultant where at every company someone complains that "Apple says it's secure, so you must be wrong". Watch the keynote. Apple refers to TouchID as "the gold standard", "one of the most powerful passwords in the world", says "it is the most advanced technology", calls it "very high security".