Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Working on OS X 10.12 Feature Allowing Macs to Be Unlocked via iPhone's Touch ID
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Being an engineer has nothing to do with being a ****ing CEO. Moving goalposts?
[doublepost=1463770535][/doublepost]
I believe he was being sarcastic.
Wtf are you talking about?
Do you really think that some rogue engineers just went out and spent millions of dollars developing each A series, which enables features critical to the entire ecosystem?
What in gods name would make a worthy CEO to you?
I have been wanting this for ages.
So long there is a fall-back to passcode, i'd much rather be able to use my phone, watch, or a combination of devices to unlock if in close proximity.
e.g., if my Mac detects my iPhone or Watch within X feet, then it may just unlock, or require fingerprint, or a retina scan or even basic facial recognition via the webcam. i.e., phone present, watch present and a face that moves matching my face in the webcam = i am there, unlock.
If those devices aren't present, then fallback to something less convenient but more secure.
Passwords are mostly dead because they need to be far too long to be secure to use conveniently. If you use a 9 character password or less, it's basically useless if the hash is known; cracking is a matter of a day or so.
But most people have more than one device, and almost everyone has a phone (whether it is an iPhone or something else).
edit: and yes, the whole point is multi-factor authentication, multiple devices. if someone steals my mac, it should be less easy to log into. but if my mac, my phone, my watch are all present in the same place then less stringent checking to see that I am at the keyboard is required. Because i'm most likely present.
So long there is a fall-back to passcode, i'd much rather be able to use my phone, watch, or a combination of devices to unlock if in close proximity.
e.g., if my Mac detects my iPhone or Watch within X feet, then it may just unlock, or require fingerprint, or a retina scan or even basic facial recognition via the webcam. i.e., phone present, watch present and a face that moves matching my face in the webcam = i am there, unlock.
If those devices aren't present, then fallback to something less convenient but more secure.
Passwords are mostly dead because they need to be far too long to be secure to use conveniently. If you use a 9 character password or less, it's basically useless if the hash is known; cracking is a matter of a day or so.
But most people have more than one device, and almost everyone has a phone (whether it is an iPhone or something else).
edit: and yes, the whole point is multi-factor authentication, multiple devices. if someone steals my mac, it should be less easy to log into. but if my mac, my phone, my watch are all present in the same place then less stringent checking to see that I am at the keyboard is required. Because i'm most likely present.
Tim Cook is the boss of Apple who answers to shareholders and Apple's board. The idea of a boss, especially one at the executive level, is to maintain order of their employees underneath them while keeping his superiors and customers happy.
So when customers sit here and read about a bunch of different software updates that have had to be pulled from the app store, or when there's battery problems, or storage problems with devices, what does that tell you? It tells you Tim is not doing a good enough job at maintaining order with the engineers and their supervisors, other employees, or the executives within the company.
Do you want another example that's a little more on topic here? The R&D team. In addition to not having any control over the order of the engineers of the company, Tim doesn't seem to be doing a very good job at making sure the R&D team is doing theirs. Look how boring the last two product launches have been---they were quite embarrassing actually. Everyone looks at the CEO and points their fingers at him when there aren't fresh products and ideas out there. I don't blame the R&D staff one bit... It's Tim's job to manage them; he is responsible for making sure the employees perform their best work, in which they haven't.
Tim is responsible for making sure every employee in every department is doing their job in the company. Now obviously he can't watch all 15,000 employees (or however many there are) at once, but he can most certainly make adjustments in management and discipline managers and directors who aren't meeting his expectations.
The CEO is also supposed to make the stockholders happy. Does it look like the stockholders are happy right now? Nope. The stock has gone from $132 a share down to $90 a share in roughly a one year span. Of course the shareholders aren't happy? Why? Because Tim has done nothing but talk out of his butt for nearly five years, so why should they have a reason to believe his fallacies of innovation and exciting products now?
He's just not a good CEO for a technology company, he lacks vision, doesn't know squat about technology (at least Steve knew some stuff about technology), he lacks energy and excitement for the products, he talks out of his butt, he isn't liked my a majority of the stockholders, people are sick of the downfall of quality, the nickel and dime tactics, and honestly I'm tired of him focusing on stupid "rights" (of individuals) when that has nothing to do with the company's operations.
I'm not saying Tim isn't a good CEO in general--he could be a good CEO for the GAP, or for Wendy's, but for a technology company? I don't think it's a good fit for him. I think Apple is way over his head and is way too much work for his talent level.
If he was disliked by a majority of the shareholders, he wouldn't be CEO right now.
I have it for iPhone,iPad and Apple Watch and it seems far from consistent for me
Vaio's finger print scanner is just tied to the BIOS password. I don't know what other secure information stored on the device that was exposed by Sony's software which you are referring to. Bios password is a hardware implemented password and it controls access to the machine. Any other secure information is handled by the OS, i.e. Windows from then on. You cannot fool the finger print scanner to gain access to the BIOS and 3 failed attempts reverts to the keyboard entry on the Vaio. If you cannot remember the BIOS password, you will have to get in touch with Sony to unlock the machine. I nearly forgot mine and searched the internet extensively to find a way to bypass it but failed. Luckily I remembered in the end and saved the day.
Finger print scanners existed long before Apple incorporated one on the iPhone. Sony simply implemented one to tie it to the BIOS password, that's all.
Bank of America's CEO isn't liked by a ton of their shareholders either, but they still have a job.
Lol. I once made a very loud comment at cafe macs when Time Machine was launched/ updated.
"Time machine. For the time Mobile Me ****s you over".
I didn't realise Jobs and Ive were sitting on the very next table.
Still. No more Mobile Me.
Edit. Can't remember if it was a launch or update.
Last edited:
Please explain. A password will always be more secure than fingerprint scanning. You can be compelled against your will for fingerprint both legally and forcibly. A court has few if any means of compelling your password from you and you must choose to provide your password.
TouchID is solely for the purpose of convenience. A means to not have to type out out a password.
[doublepost=1463784113][/doublepost]
I would describe the locks on your door as the equivalent of the password that TouchID requires you to create. The sensor in the home button is akin to the method you open that lock. (i.e. key, doorknob, et cetera).
In the US a warrant can be served for you to use your finger to unlock a phone but the courts rule against forcing you to provide a password. Personally I don't think either should be allowed but the current law makes TouchID less secure and more of a convenience.
[doublepost=1463784741][/doublepost]
**************************. http://******.com/?q=bypass+Apple+TouchID
There are plenty abeit not so simple methods to circumvent TouchID as I have previously stated that legally here in the US you can be forced to press your finger on the button and illegally as well to unlock your device. You cannot currently be legally compelled to provide your password to unlock your device.
Last edited:
Tablets have existed long before the iPad.
The iPod wasn't the first MP3 player.
The iPhone entered a market already dominated by Nokia and Blackberry.
See the trend? In those cases, the existing solutions all sucked. It wasn't that there wasn't a case to be made for such a feature, but that the implementation was lacklustre. Apple "won" by offering an option that was great to use.
Same here. If Apple can iterate on the feature and iron out the bugs, people will use it if they find value in it.
i understand your point in comparison but it is important to understand TouchId is not a security advancement, it is a convenience advancement. In our current legal system and technology TouchId makes it easier for anyone to access your data. Compared to a complex password TouchId mearly assists not deters.
Security enhancements can come via convenience enhancements.
That's the point.
Want to be pretty darn secure?
Use a 2048 bit key as your password. Have fun typing out 30-40 lines of text every time to unlock!
TouchID enables your fingerprint to be used for a limited time to cache your password (which can then be many times longer and less convenient to use). Multi-factor auth enables you to use other unique identifiers to authenticate without being inconvenienced.
E.g., iPhone; i foresee a future where touchID, a retina scan and voiceprint could be combined for 3 factor auth in a manner that is pretty seamless and doesn't even need thinking about, yet secure.
Pick up phone with finger on touchID button, look at it and say "open". Resistant to messing with individual sensors... the user doesn't have to do anything inconvenient to unlock.
Or with the mac -> user recognised on webcam (after clicking unlock to turn it on), phone present and/or watch present, user says "unlock". All those factors can be provided by the user by doing very little. Much more secure than a single factor, even if it is a 16 character password (passwords are easily stolen, observed, etc.); if implemented correctly.
I already addressed this. Reaching behind on my iMac to unlock is more work than typing in a password. Doing that on a Mac Pro is just silly.
That's quite an unfair condemnation, IMO.
Name me one company who hasn't made a single screw up in history. I can guarantee you that there are tons of CEOs out there who probably don't know what products their companies have out there. It's impossible for a CEO to micromanage every single aspect of their company and its employees. That's what middle management is for.
Yes, mistakes were made, but viewed from the entirety of what Apple has done and is currently doing, they don't seem like huge or serious mistakes that would warrant crucifying a CEO over.
Likewise, I feel that what Tim Cook is doing is no less important, even if they aren't as sexy as announcing the next iPhone. Opening up the next big market in developing countries. Quickly bring new products to market and ensuring that the manufacturing lines run efficiently 24/7 so they can continue churning out the products we know and love.
You are frustrated because Apple has yet release the "next big thing" that has taken the world by storm. That's your prerogative. Don't confuse your own personal needs with what is good for Apple in their own perspective.
Steve Jobs was crucial to reviving Apple 1.0 and putting its name back on the world map. We are now looking at Apple 2.0, which is Tim Cook's era. The Apple of today is different from the Apple of yesteryear. It is way larger, with different challenges. The same strategies that worked for Apple in the past may no longer work for Apple today.
I dare not claim that Tim Cook is the best CEO for Apple, but I daresay that he is doing a very admirable job of running Apple thus far.