Trust me on this one and most of the non-haters know this too, if Samsung had've put out the same plethora of small goodies on their GS4 as Apple did with the iPhone 5S today the Fandroids would've called it "Innovation". Sadly Apple gets crapped on for it.
Bingo! Fingerprint scanners have been in laptops and phones for quite some time now. Nobody was complaining about chopped-off fingers and NSA surveilence when it was HP, Dell or Motorola. But when Apple ships a product, it becomes a threat to personal safety?
The US Government already has that along with my DNA when I was in the service. So I gave up a long time ago and just go with the flow. As long as you keep your nose clean you have nothing to worry about.
That might have been true once upon a time, but not anymore. Go read the news. The IRS has been conducting audits against people whose politics disgree with the Administration. Can you honestly say that you have never said or publicly written anything anyone in the government would like to punish you for?
Is there an off switch? Can you revert to passcode?
It would be pretty useless if Apple disabled all other security mechanisms and forced everybody to use the scanner or have no security at all.
Keep in mind that iOS 7 will be running on many devices without fingerprint scanners (4, 4S, 5 and 5c, as well as iPads and iPod Touches) so the other authentication methods are still going to be in the software. I really don't think Apple is going to deliberately disable this software on a 5s.
Will using a password still be an option even if you have the fingerprint scanner enabled?
Good question. On Android, if you enable biometric authentication (e.g. fingerprints on a Motorol Atrix, or facial recognition on an LG Optimus), you are required to register a backup passcode/passphrase. They recognize that biometrics don't always work, and that you sometimes need to grant another person access. I assume Apple has something similar, but I haven't tried it in person to be certain.
Exactly what I was thinking, its very possible a thief can club you over the head ... Same goes for being drugged ... I'll stick with passcode. I feel its more secure.
If you're seriously concerned about this, what makes you think they won't drug you and make you reveal your passcode? Or that they won't just put a gun to your head and make you give it up that way? And if the information is so sensitive that you're willing to die for it, why the ******* would you put it on your phone in the first place?
They can use your finger against your will, they can't use your password unless you give it to them.
See my previous reply. Will you be willing to die to deny them access? And if so, what are you putting on the phone that could possibly be that important?
If so, then the reader is just a convenience item, not a real security feature... and people can still goof up by using 1234 as a PIN
I believe that is a given, Based on the presentation, Apple's concern is not with bulletproof security, but in dealing with the large number of people who don't use any security at all.
No, it's a serious question. I work for a very secret military facility and often carry secret information about weapon systems and attack plans on my iPhone. ...
Of course, this is a joke. If you really had such information, you wouldn't be allowed to tell us you had it. And you certainly wouldn't be allowed to store it on a phone. And you probably wouldn't be allowed to remove the information from its secured facility without using an approved secure courier to deliver it to its destination in another secured facility.
As it is, I'm quite sure that Apple designed this so the phone is actually not capable of sending that information anywhere.
According to Apple, fingerprint data is not accessible by appsand is not transmitted to iCloud. See
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/201...Forward-Thinking-Smartphone-in-the-World.html.:
...All fingerprint information is encrypted and stored securely in the Secure Enclave inside the A7 chip on the iPhone 5s; its never stored on Apple servers or backed up to iCloud®.
They should use this technology for guns.
It's been researched. The big problem is that it's not reliable. You don't want the legitimate owner to be locked out in an emergency.
Additionally, the shock and vibration of firing a gun tends to damage the electronics, so you pretty much only get one or two shots before the gun needs to be serviced. That makes for a pretty lousy experience at the firing range.
There are good reasons not to give a spouse your security code. A common example is when the phone contains confidential business or military information.
I think people here are talking about for your personal phone. Not for something issued by your government or your employer.
I don't know about others, but I never store personal data on my work phone and I never store work data on my personal phone.
(Regarding guns) The folks that think this is such a good idea never ask law enforcement or military. They roundly reject them, due to the lack of guaranteed reliability. Of course, some think it's a great idea for the people that might be shooting at them -- you might want to consider why that is true.
Of course, guns sold illegally on the black market, where they are likely to be used to commit crimes, are not going to have ID chips. And you can be certain that those who resell stolen guns will have the know-how to disable the circuit.