iPhone 5S, 5C Announced

[holymadness]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

I don't see why anybody would assume that the article talking about the data from the sensor being "turned into color and luminance values" would refer to the sensor of the fingerprint scanner.

The discussion went like this:
[snip]
I replied by quoting an article that mentioned RAW data, that while it can be converted into an image, is not an actual image.

Yes, it is quite puzzling that someone would assume an equivalence between the way photo data and fingerprint data are stored, transmitted, and interpreted when he has no knowledge of the technical specifications of the system in question. No one knows what is stored on the iPhone or in what format except Apple itself, which means that your theory is based on conjecture.

And I still can't figure out why you're belabouring the point in any case. Let us say that the phone simply took a photo of your fingerprint and used that for your ID. Let's even say hackers could easily get access to it. What then? Your fingerprints have been freely available to anyone who wants them your entire life.

The amusing thing is that the article you quote is bullish about the technology, which it considers to be more secure than a passcode: "it eliminates the chances of a thief guessing your code by the greasy blotches or watching you input it before taking the device."

My initial intervention on this point has to do with the notion that the fingerprint data from the phone is less than the data from a normal fingerprint scan, when in fact it is more accurate and complete. And while we leave thousands of fingerprints around every day they aren't as reliable as some TV shows make it seem. You can look at the screen of your iPhone for that: how many smudges are complete clear fingerprints?

You're simply wrong. In 2008, when fingerprint-gate was nary a glimmer in the eye of tech pundits and before forum posters suddenly and miraculously become security experts, a German "hacker" group protested against the introduction of biometric passports by obtaining and releasing the fingerprints of the country's interior minister.

By reverse engineering a handheld device with a capacitance touch fingerprint scanner, right?

"The CCC got its hands on Schauble's prints thanks to a sympathiser, who scarpered with a glass used by the minister during a panel discussion and handed it over to the hackers. Along with Minister Schauble's fingerprint, the group also published... a guide on how to capture someone's fingerprints from a glass successfully."

Oh.

Obtaining fingerprints is trivial. Always has been. So why are you only now suddenly so up in arms?

You are assuming here that the reticence regarding the use of a passcode has to do with the inconvenience of having to enter it every time and not the inconvenience of having to remember another code. But let's take your example. If it's cold and you want to use gloves, or you use hand cream, or if your finger is wet for whatever reason, you can't use the fingerprint scanner and you have to enter a passcode.

If you can't use your fingerprint scanner because you're wearing gloves, you can't use the touchscreen in any case, so why would you be attempting to access your phone? Perhaps you are imagining some sort of person who has filthy, greasy, dirty fingers 24/7, all year round. Well, I guess they won't be using the scanner, but their phone will be no less secure than it was before. The real question is why do you assume that no one is going to take advantage of this technology? I think tons of people will. It will prove massively popular for its 'wow-factor' alone, not to mention the convenience.

You're searching for excuses to find fault with something about which you know very little and which you have never seen implemented. Again, why? What, specifically, is the nature of your concern?

It's an additional layer of security that is mandatory to a new feature that is a layer of security.

And? Is this supposed to be significant? This is like reproaching a bank for having cameras and a security guard.

It is telling that, once again, you immediately jump to the worst possible conclusion without any evidence that it's the correct one. Aside from an additional layer of security, it seems prudent to build a secondary fail-safe system into a security protocol that has fairly rigorous requirements (that the user be physically present to access the phone, and that the user's fingerprints be readable). I can think of lots of situations where those conditions would be unfulfilled, but where the user would still want access to his or her phone using a passcode. If someone leaves their phone at home by accident and wants a family member to unlock it and look something up for them. If someone suffers an accident where their fingers or hands are mangled or lost entirely. If someone's fingerprints change due to aging or other genetic factors, rendering them unrecognizable to the scanner. If the stored fingerprint data becomes corrupted. If someone's fingerprints are too dirty to be read but cannot be immediately cleaned (covered in paint, for example). Ad infinitum.

[sadievan]

Originally Posted by afv011

4S for a S4 - nice swap (pun intended).

Good catch.

[sadievan]

Originally Posted by Jessica Lares

I'm getting the 5S in 64GB and gold. And then the Beige and Blue cases. I'm really excited about the fingerprint scanner. Mostly because it might take advantage of iCloud Keychain, and then because I won't have to type my passwords anymore.

Looking forward to using the new camera. I love the whole multiple shots thing.

Oh, and Infinity Blade III!!!

I plan on the 5S in silver/white. The fingerprint scanner doesn't really do anything for me. But who knows, I may like it.

[sadievan]

Originally Posted by afv011

I guess they missed the memo on iMaps. And Siri. And the antenna for the 4. And the battery for the 4S.

Now you know that was just because they were holding it wrong.

[sadievan]

Originally Posted by treadlightly

Also, can I transfer my SIM card from the 3S to the 5S or do I have to go through my service provider? Thanks.

I'm not sure but I think the SIM card is smaller on the newer phones.

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by treadlightly

Also, can I transfer my SIM card from the 3S to the 5S or do I have to go through my service provider? Thanks.

The 5, 5S and 5C use a Nano-SIM, the 4 and 4S use a Micro-SIM and the original iPhone, 3 and 3GS use a regular SIM.


There's an article here about trimming your SIM into a Nano-SIM if you're feeling brave...
http://reviews.cnet.co.uk/mobile-pho...size-50009289/

[afv011]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

The 5, 5S and 5C use a Nano-SIM, the 4 and 4S use a Micro-SIM and the original iPhone, 3 and 3GS use a regular SIM.


There's an article here about trimming your SIM into a Nano-SIM if you're feeling brave...
http://reviews.cnet.co.uk/mobile-pho...size-50009289/

Going from SIM to microSIM is simple enough, you just have to cut the SIM using a template. However, nanoSIMs are also thinner than SIM/microSIMs, so I don't suggest you manually do it, just get your telco to supply a new nanoSIM.

[David Munch]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

Maybe authentication looks only for specific markers, but what is stored on the iPhone is an encoded scan of the fingerprint.

No, as the scanner never reads the entire fingerprint, it only encodes specific markers, not the entire print. (Just to be sure that it is clear - We might be nitpicking here! )

In any case, it would still require NSA to obtain the proprietary software from Apple, in order to decode the information. I assume they would have a much harder time doing that, compared to just obtaining the fingerprint data itself.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by holymadness

Yes, it is quite puzzling that someone would assume [...]

Assume that the whore thing is considered, but it is getting too long to quote it all.
1. I'm not arguing that the NSA, evil genius masterminds or random thieves will go through the trouble of hacking your phone to get the fingerprint data that is stored there. If someone stole your phone they get more fingerprints and ear prints from the surface of the phone than they can from the internal data.

What I'm arguing about is that the fingerprint data that is stored on the phone is complete on the one fingerprint that is used to unlock the phone.

2. You can use a touch screen if you are wearing thin gloves but you would have to remove them to scan the fingerprint.

3. The bank analogy is wrong in this case because you were arguing that the reason is for this security measure was that 50% of people weren't using a passcode, and there are no banks with no security.

A better analogy would be like this: let's say that most people choose not to have locks on the entrance to the apartment building because they don't want to have to open those doors with a code every time. So an alternative security measure is presented: you can have a face scanner. But for security reasons you have to have a passcode if the apartment building has this feature. And the passcode will have to be used whenever the face scanner isn't capable to recognize your face, or if you haven't been to your apartment in a couple of days.

Originally Posted by David Munch

No, as the scanner never reads the entire fingerprint, it only encodes specific markers, not the entire print. (Just to be sure that it is clear - We might be nitpicking here! )

What makes you say this?

[Sregener]

Originally Posted by David Munch

In any case, it would still require NSA to obtain the proprietary software from Apple, in order to decode the information. I assume they would have a much harder time doing that, compared to just obtaining the fingerprint data itself.

Given the existence of secret courts and the fact the NSA has manipulated encryption software to make it easier for them to hack it, I don't put much faith in technology keeping the government snoops away. Technology lets the government snoops in in ways the founders never imagined when they wrote the 4th amendment.

[holymadness]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

Assume that the whole thing is considered, but it is getting too long to quote it all.

I feel like we're going around in circles. Why don't you lay out your specific concerns about the fingerprint scanner, i.e. what you consider to be its potential risks or consequences, and we'll go from there.

[Dulin's Books]

[QUOTE=holymadness;2626405

If you can't use your fingerprint scanner because you're wearing gloves, you can't use the touchscreen in any case, [/QUOTE]

not true. i can easily use my phone's touchscreen with my fingers with gloves on. there is a setting that you can turn to make it ultra sensitve for just that.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by Dulin's Books

not true. i can easily use my phone's touchscreen with my fingers with gloves on. there is a setting that you can turn to make it ultra sensitve for just that.

Also works with surgical gloves without any special settings.

[David Munch]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

What makes you say this?

Apple has stated so, both publicly and in their tech documents.

Originally Posted by Sregener

Given the existence of secret courts and the fact the NSA has manipulated encryption software to make it easier for them to hack it, I don't put much faith in technology keeping the government snoops away. Technology lets the government snoops in in ways the founders never imagined when they wrote the 4th amendment.

At least there is some hope!

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by holymadness

I feel like we're going around in circles. Why don't you lay out your specific concerns about the fingerprint scanner, i.e. what you consider to be its potential risks or consequences, and we'll go from there.

I just don't see it as an improvement security-wise. People who didn't want to use a passcode are going to avoid this because it still requires a passcode. It isn't another layer of security. It is more like making another door, a door that the manufacturer tells you won't always open for you.

Originally Posted by David Munch

Apple has stated so, both publicly and in their tech documents.

Can you give me a link to a quote or tech document?

Apple's presentation video points to the opposite conclusion. It shows an image that gets more complete as the person places the finger repeatedly on the scanner in the process of setting up Touch ID, as the voice is saying "and every time you use it, it gets better at reading your print".