Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.mobile.android > #140838 > unrolled thread

Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo

Started byMickey D <mickeydavis078XX@ptd.net>
First post2024-05-05 14:47 -0400
Last post2024-05-06 11:34 +0100
Articles 20 on this page of 127 — 21 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android


Contents

  Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Mickey D <mickeydavis078XX@ptd.net> - 2024-05-05 14:47 -0400
    Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2024-05-05 21:23 +0200
      Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Oliver <ollie@invalid.net> - 2024-05-05 13:42 -0600
      Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2024-05-05 17:06 -0400
        Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid> - 2024-05-05 19:04 -0500
          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo WolfFan <akwolffan@zoho.com> - 2024-05-05 21:49 -0400
            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo WolfFan <akwolffan@zoho.com> - 2024-05-05 22:30 -0400
              Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-06 02:56 +0000
    Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-05 22:20 +0200
      Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2024-05-05 17:04 -0400
        Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-06 09:04 +0200
          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-06 08:16 +0000
            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-06 10:45 -0700
          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2024-05-06 10:54 -0400
            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-06 18:55 +0200
              Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2024-05-06 13:33 -0400
                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-06 21:38 +0200
              Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-07 08:53 +0200
                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-07 10:12 +0200
                  Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-07 17:28 +0200
                    Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-07 19:07 +0200
                      Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-08 11:49 +0200
                        Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-08 12:31 +0200
                        Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2024-05-08 12:09 -0400
                        Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-08 16:22 +0000
                          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-09 23:24 +0000
                            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-09 17:28 -0700
                              Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Bill Powell <bill@anarchists.org> - 2024-05-10 19:16 +0200
                                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "Jan K." <janicekoziol@nie.ma.spamu.prosze.com> - 2024-05-10 19:24 +0200
                                  Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Larry Wolff <larrywolff@larrywolff.net> - 2024-05-10 13:51 -0400
                                    Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-10 18:30 +0000
                                    Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Peter Piper <peterpiper@nospam.invalid> - 2024-05-10 19:01 +0000
                                      Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-10 20:54 +0000
                                  Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-05-10 22:40 +0200
                                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-10 11:34 -0700
                                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-10 13:47 -0700
      Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-06 10:04 +0200
        Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-05-06 10:23 +0200
          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-05-06 11:41 +0100
            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-05-08 12:36 +0200
          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2024-05-06 10:59 -0400
            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-06 18:24 +0000
              Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-06 13:49 -0700
                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2024-05-06 17:04 -0400
              Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-07 09:05 +0200
                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-07 17:33 +0200
          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-05-06 16:28 -0400
            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2024-05-06 17:02 -0400
              Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-05-06 21:44 -0400
                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-10 01:39 +0000
              Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-07 09:08 +0200
                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2024-05-07 08:27 -0400
            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-05-08 12:43 +0200
          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-07 08:53 +0200
        Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-06 11:51 +0200
          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2024-05-06 11:02 -0400
            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-06 16:24 +0000
              Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-06 19:13 +0200
                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2024-05-06 13:37 -0400
                  Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-06 22:08 +0200
                    Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2024-05-06 16:56 -0400
                      Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-07 09:17 +0200
                        Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2024-05-07 08:29 -0400
                          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-10 01:38 +0000
                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-06 23:49 +0000
                  Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-07 09:40 +0200
                    Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-07 15:18 +0000
                      Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-07 18:42 +0200
                        Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-05-07 18:35 +0000
                          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-07 22:11 +0200
                            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-05-08 13:53 +0000
                              Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-08 17:36 +0200
                                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-08 16:17 +0000
                                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-05-08 17:37 +0000
                                  Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-08 20:26 +0200
                              Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-08 09:05 -0700
                                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-08 09:39 -0700
                                  Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-05-08 20:16 +0100
                                    Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2024-05-08 15:31 -0400
                                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2024-05-08 12:57 -0400
                                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-05-08 17:23 +0000
                                  Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-08 12:10 -0700
                                    Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid> - 2024-05-08 16:38 -0500
                                    Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-08 16:21 -0700
                                      Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-05-09 14:01 +0200
                                        Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-09 08:57 -0700
                                          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-09 09:13 -0700
                                            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-09 16:27 +0000
                                            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-09 09:32 -0700
                                              Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-09 11:07 -0700
                                                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-09 11:24 -0700
                                                  Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-09 17:31 -0700
                                                    Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-09 17:43 -0700
                                                      Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-09 18:06 -0700
                                                        Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-10 09:58 -0700
                        Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-08 02:08 +0000
                          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-10 21:34 +0000
                            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-10 14:55 -0700
                            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-10 22:21 +0000
                              Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-11 04:08 +0000
                                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-11 04:38 +0000
                                  Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-11 13:58 +0000
                                    Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-11 15:51 +0000
                                      Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-11 16:59 +0000
                                        Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-11 19:39 +0000
                                          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-11 20:00 +0000
                                            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-11 21:21 +0000
                                              Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-11 22:10 +0000
                                                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo danmin@danminart-dot-com.no-spam.invalid (Danart) - 2024-05-24 17:35 +0000
                                  Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2024-05-11 17:43 +0200
                                    Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-11 15:53 +0000
            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-06 19:03 +0200
              Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2024-05-06 13:35 -0400
                Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-06 22:10 +0200
                  Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2024-05-06 16:59 -0400
          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-05-06 16:19 +0100
            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2024-05-06 19:10 +0200
              Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-06 10:50 -0700
          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-06 10:49 -0700
          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-07 09:13 +0200
    Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Mickey D <mickeydavis078XX@ptd.net> - 2024-05-06 02:09 -0400
      Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-05-06 12:10 +0100
        Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Mickey D <mickeydavis078XX@ptd.net> - 2024-05-06 07:56 -0400
          Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-05-06 15:06 +0100
            Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Mickey D <mickeydavis078XX@ptd.net> - 2024-05-06 14:56 -0400
              Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-05-07 07:02 +0000
    Re: Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-05-06 11:34 +0100

Page 3 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7  Next page →


#140872

FromAlan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com>
Date2024-05-06 10:59 -0400
Message-ID<jf6_N.37870$nQv.18368@fx10.iad>
In reply to#140861
On 2024-05-06 04:23, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2024-05-06 10:04, Arno Welzel wrote:
>> R.Wieser, 2024-05-05 22:20:
>>
>>> Mickey,
>>>
>>>> Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo.
>>>
>>> And thats just one of the more complex methods there are.
>>>
>>> You touch surfaces almost every day without even realizing it - hey, 
>>> that is
>>> what hands and fingers are for, right ? - effectivily broadcasting that
>>> feature of yourself to everyone around you.
>>>
>>> Same goes for "faceprints".  Even easier, as your faceprint can be 
>>> "taken"
>>> from literally tens of meters away.
>>
>> Except that unlocking with your face in iOS is *not* only using an image
>> of your face but also the three dimensional shape of it. That's the
>> reason why the "notch" in the iPhone displays is bigger since there is
>> not only a camera but also a 3D sensor to capture the shape of your face.
> 
> What is a "3D sensor" actually?  :-)

In the case of iPhone the 'shape' of the face is determined as described 
here:

https://support.apple.com/en-ca/102381

The term Apple uses is "depth map of your face"

Further: "and also captures an infrared image of your face."

-- 
“Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first;
  nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first.”
- Charles de Gaulle.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140888

FromAndrew <andrew@spam.net>
Date2024-05-06 18:24 +0000
Message-ID<v1b78p$p5r$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
In reply to#140872
On Mon, 6 May 2024 10:59:27 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:

>> What is a "3D sensor" actually?� :-)
> 
> In the case of iPhone the 'shape' of the face is determined as described 
> here:
> 
> https://support.apple.com/en-ca/102381
> 
> The term Apple uses is "depth map of your face"
> 
> Further: "and also captures an infrared image of your face."

Phone biometrics are nothing more or less than a marketing gimmick.

You're the same Alan Browne on the Apple newsgroup who claims that you read 
white papers from Apple "proving" there is no such thing as the walled 
garden.

Only a nutcase Apple religious zealot would deny the existence of the
infamous walled garden - especially amongst an Android/Windows newsgroup.

Because Apple said so, you are adamant the walled garden is a myth.
Likewise with all the fancy words Apple marketing uses for its gimmicks.

You only eat, drink & excrete Apple marketing bullshit gimmickry.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140896

FromAlan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Date2024-05-06 13:49 -0700
Message-ID<v1bfnu$2pdgr$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#140888
On 2024-05-06 11:24, Andrew wrote:
> On Mon, 6 May 2024 10:59:27 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
> 
>>> What is a "3D sensor" actually?� :-)
>>
>> In the case of iPhone the 'shape' of the face is determined as described
>> here:
>>
>> https://support.apple.com/en-ca/102381
>>
>> The term Apple uses is "depth map of your face"
>>
>> Further: "and also captures an infrared image of your face."
> 
> Phone biometrics are nothing more or less than a marketing gimmick.

Biometric unlocking is a way to make phones convenient for the user 
while sufficiently inconvenient for miscreants.

Period.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140900

FromAlan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com>
Date2024-05-06 17:04 -0400
Message-ID<aBb_N.37890$nQv.30407@fx10.iad>
In reply to#140896
On 2024-05-06 16:49, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-05-06 11:24, Andrew wrote:
>> On Mon, 6 May 2024 10:59:27 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
>>
>>>> What is a "3D sensor" actually?� :-)
>>>
>>> In the case of iPhone the 'shape' of the face is determined as described
>>> here:
>>>
>>> https://support.apple.com/en-ca/102381
>>>
>>> The term Apple uses is "depth map of your face"
>>>
>>> Further: "and also captures an infrared image of your face."
>>
>> Phone biometrics are nothing more or less than a marketing gimmick.
> 
> Biometric unlocking is a way to make phones convenient for the user 
> while sufficiently inconvenient for miscreants.

They are also a key feature of "Passkey" related login procedures which 
are gaining momentum as a preferred way for people to log into various 
sites.

-- 
“Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first;
  nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first.”
- Charles de Gaulle.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140909

FromArno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de>
Date2024-05-07 09:05 +0200
Message-ID<l9u25aFj4iiU4@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#140888
Andrew, 2024-05-06 20:24:

> On Mon, 6 May 2024 10:59:27 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
> 
>>> What is a "3D sensor" actually?� :-)
>>
>> In the case of iPhone the 'shape' of the face is determined as described 
>> here:
>>
>> https://support.apple.com/en-ca/102381
>>
>> The term Apple uses is "depth map of your face"
>>
>> Further: "and also captures an infrared image of your face."
> 
> Phone biometrics are nothing more or less than a marketing gimmick.

Scanning the *shape* of a face and not just the *image* is still a
different approach than just using the image and that's one of the main
reasons why Google does not include "face unlock" in their Pixel phones,
since just using an image of someones face is way to simple.

Besides that you can call most "real" biometrics a "marketing gimmick"
since you can *always* make a copy of the images which are used for
fingerprint scanners, eye scanners and so on. The question is not, if
something is absolutly secure and can never be broken at all but how
much effort is needed to break something.

When I got my last passport I also had to provide biometric scans of my
fingers. The way how that fingerprint scanner worked was just taking an
*image* of my fingerprints:

<https://www.dermalog.com/products/hardware/fingerprint-scanners/f1>

"DERMALOG F1 – One of the World’s Smallest Optical Fingerprint Scanners

Its compliance to international standards make the F1 suitable for a
wide range of biometric documents and application possibilities -
capturing fingerprints for ePassports, ID Cards and
verification-processes within the blink of an eye. The self-explanatory
DERMALOG solution meets international standards defined for biometric
workflows."

They even advertise the use of their fingerprint scanners for biometric
ID cards:

<https://www.dermalog.com/turnkey-solutions/government/biometric-id-cards>

And yes, it is just optical, nothing else. So anyone can fake the
fingerprints, even those which are included scanned with an "official"
device used by authorities.


-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140924

FromArno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de>
Date2024-05-07 17:33 +0200
Message-ID<l9uvv0FmqjmU10@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#140909
Arno Welzel, 2024-05-07 09:05:

> Andrew, 2024-05-06 20:24:
> 
>> On Mon, 6 May 2024 10:59:27 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
>>
>>>> What is a "3D sensor" actually?� :-)
>>>
>>> In the case of iPhone the 'shape' of the face is determined as described 
>>> here:
>>>
>>> https://support.apple.com/en-ca/102381
>>>
>>> The term Apple uses is "depth map of your face"
>>>
>>> Further: "and also captures an infrared image of your face."
>>
>> Phone biometrics are nothing more or less than a marketing gimmick.
> 
> Scanning the *shape* of a face and not just the *image* is still a
> different approach than just using the image and that's one of the main
> reasons why Google does not include "face unlock" in their Pixel phones,
> since just using an image of someones face is way to simple.
> 
> Besides that you can call most "real" biometrics a "marketing gimmick"
> since you can *always* make a copy of the images which are used for
> fingerprint scanners, eye scanners and so on. The question is not, if
> something is absolutly secure and can never be broken at all but how
> much effort is needed to break something.
> 
> When I got my last passport I also had to provide biometric scans of my
> fingers. The way how that fingerprint scanner worked was just taking an
> *image* of my fingerprints:
> 
> <https://www.dermalog.com/products/hardware/fingerprint-scanners/f1>
> 
> "DERMALOG F1 – One of the World’s Smallest Optical Fingerprint Scanners
> 
> Its compliance to international standards make the F1 suitable for a
> wide range of biometric documents and application possibilities -
> capturing fingerprints for ePassports, ID Cards and
> verification-processes within the blink of an eye. The self-explanatory
> DERMALOG solution meets international standards defined for biometric
> workflows."
> 
> They even advertise the use of their fingerprint scanners for biometric
> ID cards:
> 
> <https://www.dermalog.com/turnkey-solutions/government/biometric-id-cards>
> 
> And yes, it is just optical, nothing else. So anyone can fake the
> fingerprints, even those which are included scanned with an "official"
> device used by authorities.

Addition: yes, the device also checks, if the scanned finger is alive
and won't accept just an image. But the result is still just an *image*
which is used for the biometric data in the passport. And creating fake
fingers including the properties required for "alive" detection or fake
fingerprints you can stick to your fingertips is not impossible either.

-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140895

FromPaul <nospam@needed.invalid>
Date2024-05-06 16:28 -0400
Message-ID<v1beh1$2p5c4$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#140861
On 5/6/2024 4:23 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2024-05-06 10:04, Arno Welzel wrote:
>> R.Wieser, 2024-05-05 22:20:
>>
>>> Mickey,
>>>
>>>> Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo.
>>>
>>> And thats just one of the more complex methods there are.
>>>
>>> You touch surfaces almost every day without even realizing it - hey, that is
>>> what hands and fingers are for, right ? - effectivily broadcasting that
>>> feature of yourself to everyone around you.
>>>
>>> Same goes for "faceprints".  Even easier, as your faceprint can be "taken"
>>> from literally tens of meters away.
>>
>> Except that unlocking with your face in iOS is *not* only using an image
>> of your face but also the three dimensional shape of it. That's the
>> reason why the "notch" in the iPhone displays is bigger since there is
>> not only a camera but also a 3D sensor to capture the shape of your face.
> 
> What is a "3D sensor" actually?  :-)
> 

Stereoscopic imaging is a start.

For an encyclopedic article, you have to do a lot of guessing here.

   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_RealSense

The third party sensor there, the article makes it seem it is a
single array, but there are enough pixels for two arrays. And like
the human eye, as long as the collecting optics are separated by
enough, you get some extract-able depth information.

Some of the cameras Intel makes, have an IR projector, and the "ordinary" sensor
arrays in the Intel camera see out far enough, to pick up the IR pattern.

   https://dev.intelrealsense.com/docs/projectors

For Windows Hello, this additional information (collect depth info
from projected IR onto a 3D object), was supposed to make it harder
to fake an authenticating face. But I think hackers managed to defeat
Windows Hello anyway.

One of the things with these cameras, is they don't always have
a fleet of "ready applications" for end users. They can include
an SDK and you write your own software.

One of the things on the SDK for the Intel camera, is you can
stick the head of a statue on a turntable, and rotate the object
slowly, and the Intel RealSense camera will give you a file suitable
for 3D printing. And you can make a "copy" of the object you just scanned
(out of filament).

One software person working with the Intel kit, called what the
Intel camera was sending a "point cloud", and that's also a
terminology used with LIDAR systems for automobiles.

The LIDAR industry still exists, but they've been keeping a low profile :-/

https://cleantechnica.com/2021/03/12/lidar-may-be-harmful-to-people-cameras/

   Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140899

FromAlan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com>
Date2024-05-06 17:02 -0400
Message-ID<Rzb_N.37889$nQv.20152@fx10.iad>
In reply to#140895
On 2024-05-06 16:28, Paul wrote:
> On 5/6/2024 4:23 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:

>> What is a "3D sensor" actually?  :-)
>>
> 
> Stereoscopic imaging is a start.

Which, alas is not what the iPhone does in FaceID.  To be clear, stereo 
requires at least two points of view (say two cameras a little bit 
apart, or images taken from a slightly different position.  This is a 
passive process as well (in most cases).

What FaceID does is project a pattern onto the face and then measure the 
positions to generate a depth map from a single POV sensor (therefore 
not stereoscopic).

-- 
“Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first;
  nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first.”
- Charles de Gaulle.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140903

FromPaul <nospam@needed.invalid>
Date2024-05-06 21:44 -0400
Message-ID<v1c12l$2su3b$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#140899
On 5/6/2024 5:02 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2024-05-06 16:28, Paul wrote:
>> On 5/6/2024 4:23 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> 
>>> What is a "3D sensor" actually?  :-)
>>>
>>
>> Stereoscopic imaging is a start.
> 
> Which, alas is not what the iPhone does in FaceID.  To be clear, stereo requires at least two points of view (say two cameras a little bit apart, or images taken from a slightly different position.  This is a passive process as well (in most cases).
> 
> What FaceID does is project a pattern onto the face and then measure the positions to generate a depth map from a single POV sensor (therefore not stereoscopic).
> 

The Intel projects a pattern too.

   https://dev.intelrealsense.com/docs/projectors

The Wikipedia article, traces the history:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_ID

  "Face ID's technology is based on PrimeSense's previous work with low-cost
   infrared depth perception that was the basis of the Kinect motion sensor
   for the Xbox console line from Microsoft; Apple had acquired PrimeSense
   in 2013 after Microsoft started to wane on the use of Kinect"

The Intel article here mentions:

   https://dev.intelrealsense.com/docs/projectors

   "Furthermore, different types of projectors were used for each camera. The
    D415 uses two AMS Heptagon projectors, while the D435 uses an AMS Princeton
    Optronics projector with a wider emission angle but fewer spots"             (Not the same as PrimeSense necessarily)

   "In the current systems, these projectors have been placed between the
    left and right stereo imagers, and they are generally also synched to
    turn on only when required.

    However, it is important to note that this is not a strict requirement.
    For Active Stereo Depth systems, no a priori knowledge of the projection
    pattern is needed and there is no requirement of strict stability over
    time of these patterns. Also, it does not matter if other cameras point
    at the same scene with their projectors. To a first order, all additional
    projectors actually improve the overall performance by adding more light
    and more texture. We emphasize this property here, because it is in stark
    contrast to “structured light” or “coded light” depth sensors that many
    are familiar with (ex: The Microsoft Kinect, RealSense F200 and SR305,
    Orbbec Astra, or Apple iPhone X)

    where there are strong requirements on pattern stability across time and
    temperature that ultimately lead to increased cost and make them more
    susceptible to external interference."

That's a section comparing the schemes.

    Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140989

FromAndrew <andrew@spam.net>
Date2024-05-10 01:39 +0000
Message-ID<v1jtro$r5$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
In reply to#140903
Paul wrote on Mon, 6 May 2024 21:44:52 -0400 :

> The Intel projects a pattern too.
> 
>    https://dev.intelrealsense.com/docs/projectors


Biometric marketing gimmicks are expressly designed to make gullible but
ignorant iPhone users *feel* safe, because the factual truth is the iPhone
is (and always was) by far the most exploited smartphone on the planet.

https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140910

FromArno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de>
Date2024-05-07 09:08 +0200
Message-ID<l9u2bcFj4iiU5@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#140899
Alan Browne, 2024-05-06 23:02:

> On 2024-05-06 16:28, Paul wrote:
>> On 5/6/2024 4:23 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> 
>>> What is a "3D sensor" actually?  :-)
>>>
>>
>> Stereoscopic imaging is a start.
> 
> Which, alas is not what the iPhone does in FaceID.  To be clear, stereo 
> requires at least two points of view (say two cameras a little bit 
> apart, or images taken from a slightly different position.  This is a 
> passive process as well (in most cases).

I did not state, that Apple uses steroscopic imaging, just an additional
sensor beside the camera so the three dimensional shape of the face is
also taken into account for the unlock process and not just the visual
image of it.

> What FaceID does is project a pattern onto the face and then measure the 
> positions to generate a depth map from a single POV sensor (therefore 
> not stereoscopic).

Exactly. And this is more than just comparing an image, so you can not
fool the system by just using an image of the owner in a flat medium in
front of the camera.

-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140918

FromAlan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com>
Date2024-05-07 08:27 -0400
Message-ID<R6p_N.19099$n_S2.1201@fx42.iad>
In reply to#140910
On 2024-05-07 03:08, Arno Welzel wrote:
> Alan Browne, 2024-05-06 23:02:
> 
>> On 2024-05-06 16:28, Paul wrote:
>>> On 5/6/2024 4:23 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>
>>>> What is a "3D sensor" actually?  :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Stereoscopic imaging is a start. [AAA] <-------
>>
>> Which, alas is not what the iPhone does in FaceID.  To be clear, stereo
>> requires at least two points of view (say two cameras a little bit
>> apart, or images taken from a slightly different position.  This is a
>> passive process as well (in most cases).
> 
> I did not state, that Apple uses steroscopic imaging,

<snipped>

You left a TL;DR sort of reply.  By bringing up (to get going) an item 
irrelevant to the subject [AAA] above doesn't get you much traction, alas.

-- 
“Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first;
  nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first.”
- Charles de Gaulle.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140940

From"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Date2024-05-08 12:43 +0200
Message-ID<lj1sgkxksu.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
In reply to#140895
On 2024-05-06 22:28, Paul wrote:
> On 5/6/2024 4:23 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2024-05-06 10:04, Arno Welzel wrote:
>>> R.Wieser, 2024-05-05 22:20:

...

>>> Except that unlocking with your face in iOS is *not* only using an image
>>> of your face but also the three dimensional shape of it. That's the
>>> reason why the "notch" in the iPhone displays is bigger since there is
>>> not only a camera but also a 3D sensor to capture the shape of your face.
>>
>> What is a "3D sensor" actually?  :-)
>>
> 
> Stereoscopic imaging is a start.
> 
> For an encyclopedic article, you have to do a lot of guessing here.
> 
>     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_RealSense

...

Thanks :-)

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140907

FromArno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de>
Date2024-05-07 08:53 +0200
Message-ID<l9u1fuFj4iiU3@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#140861
Carlos E.R., 2024-05-06 10:23:

> On 2024-05-06 10:04, Arno Welzel wrote:
>> R.Wieser, 2024-05-05 22:20:
>>
>>> Mickey,
>>>
>>>> Be careful - they can lift a fingerprint off a digital photo.
>>>
>>> And thats just one of the more complex methods there are.
>>>
>>> You touch surfaces almost every day without even realizing it - hey, that is
>>> what hands and fingers are for, right ? - effectivily broadcasting that
>>> feature of yourself to everyone around you.
>>>
>>> Same goes for "faceprints".  Even easier, as your faceprint can be "taken"
>>> from literally tens of meters away.
>>
>> Except that unlocking with your face in iOS is *not* only using an image
>> of your face but also the three dimensional shape of it. That's the
>> reason why the "notch" in the iPhone displays is bigger since there is
>> not only a camera but also a 3D sensor to capture the shape of your face.
> 
> What is a "3D sensor" actually?  :-)

A sensor which is able to scan the shape of the face in three dimensions.

-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140862

From"R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid>
Date2024-05-06 11:51 +0200
Message-ID<v1a979$2g9jp$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#140856
Arno,

> Except that unlocking with your face in iOS is *not* only using an image
> of your face but also the three dimensional shape of it.

Yes, and ?   3D printers exist.

And thats the buget solution.  People who created 3D heads (and full body
representations) have existed since *forever* - statues anyone?   And as a
more contemporary example just take a look at Madame Tussauds in New York.
(and others like it).

> Yes, in Android using *images* of a face to unlock a phone is indeed
> not a good idea.

Its a *very good* idea.  It should *not ever* happen though. :-)

Coming up with a new locking mechanism (mechanical or software) isn't all
that hard.  What is is to make sure that only the key designed for it can
actually open it.

If you want to see examples of how locks, even expensive ones, can be 
bypassed with the proverbial paperclip I would like to refer you to the 
"Lockpicking Lawyer" clips on YouTube.  Those are enlighting.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140873

FromAlan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com>
Date2024-05-06 11:02 -0400
Message-ID<Vh6_N.37873$nQv.3362@fx10.iad>
In reply to#140862
On 2024-05-06 05:51, R.Wieser wrote:
> Arno,
> 
>> Except that unlocking with your face in iOS is *not* only using an image
>> of your face but also the three dimensional shape of it.
> 
> Yes, and ?   3D printers exist.

That also express the thermal (IR) "print" that FaceID is looking for?


-- 
“Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first;
  nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first.”
- Charles de Gaulle.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140875

FromJolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Date2024-05-06 16:24 +0000
Message-ID<l9sehrFbtdbU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#140873
On 2024-05-06, Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
> On 2024-05-06 05:51, R.Wieser wrote:
>> Arno,
>> 
>>> Except that unlocking with your face in iOS is *not* only using an
>>> image of your face but also the three dimensional shape of it.
>> 
>> Yes, and ?   3D printers exist.
>
> That also express the thermal (IR) "print" that FaceID is looking for?

These trolls are just replying the same lines they used back when Face
ID was first announced. They were wrong then, and they're just as wrong
now.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140880

From"R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid>
Date2024-05-06 19:13 +0200
Message-ID<v1b34s$2mfh0$4@dont-email.me>
In reply to#140875
Jolly,

> These trolls are just replying the same lines they used back when Face
> ID was first announced. They were wrong then, and they're just as wrong
> now.

And according to you, which of the pro/con parties is trolling ?

... or should I just presume that you are the one trying to troll us both ?

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140883

FromAlan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com>
Date2024-05-06 13:37 -0400
Message-ID<Sz8_N.76363$neD.59472@fx11.iad>
In reply to#140880
On 2024-05-06 13:13, R.Wieser wrote:
> Jolly,
> 
>> These trolls are just replying the same lines they used back when Face
>> ID was first announced. They were wrong then, and they're just as wrong
>> now.
> 
> And according to you, which of the pro/con parties is trolling ?
> 
> ... or should I just presume that you are the one trying to troll us both ?

You fail again.  I suggest you take leave of the field, declare victory 
for yourself (another white ribbon as when you were a child) and find 
something more in line with your meagre talents.

-- 
“Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first;
  nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first.”
- Charles de Gaulle.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#140893

From"R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid>
Date2024-05-06 22:08 +0200
Message-ID<v1bdf9$2ou59$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#140883
Alan,

>>> These trolls are just replying the same lines they used back when Face
>>> ID was first announced. They were wrong then, and they're just as wrong
>>> now.
>>
>> And according to you, which of the pro/con parties is trolling ?
>>
>> ... or should I just presume that you are the one trying to troll us both 
>> ?
>
> You fail again.  I suggest you take leave of the field, declare victory 
> for yourself (another white ribbon as when you were a child) and find 
> something more in line with your meagre talents.

All I see is someone who claims stuff, but brings nothing forward to support 
it.  A hot-air balloon.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 3 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android


csiph-web