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.
Details Emerge Regarding 'Face ID' Setup Process on iPhone X
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
as awesome as the tech looks, I'm personally optimistic it won't be this slow and won't require a screen to line up our faces, that just seems very not Apple. i imagine it scan your face on raise to wake in the background and then do the usual "unlocked" (which can no longer be in the centre top lol, maybe at the bottom). Furthermore i have a feeling 3D scan also means in apple pay even if the phone is pointing toward your chin and jaw it will be able to recognise you ( support for this can be seen in the enrollment process) i just don't think this will be what people are expecting.
Is a comma required in your sentence? I read it as having a distinct meaning if there is a comma...
But "safeguards" should not be put in place to thwart lawful judicial orders.
Should Bernard Madoff, John Gotti, Ted Bundy, Timothy McVeigh, Kenneth Lay (Enron), Jeffrey "Jeff the chef" Dahmer, various politicians who committed crimes, etc. have "safeguards" on their phones, computers, homes, businesses, bank accounts, etc to prevent law enforcement from collecting evidence that's necessary to prosecute the crimes they're accused of committing?
If you believe there's a good chance you'll be stopped by the police after committing a crime, and for some reason there's evidence on your phone that speaks to the crime you committed, the new iPhone may not be the right phone for you.
Not really. See a side to side comparison? The old classic Macintosh icon is almost exactly the same as the new Faces indicator icon.It's the Finder icon modernized to look like a person holding an iPhone in front of their face.
(at least the second screenshot has it edited to look like that)
Wanting to keep private information private does not mean you are a criminal.
There are nearly infinite examples of private, secret, or sensitive information that isn't criminal or immoral in nature. Here are some:
Also, crimes are not necessarily wrong or evil. There are actions (like criticizing the government) that would be considered treason in authoritarian countries, but are fundamental rights in the free world.
There are nearly infinite examples of private, secret, or sensitive information that isn't criminal or immoral in nature. Here are some:
- Your employer has proprietary information and it is frequently targeted by espionage.
- Your ex is a cop and convinces his coworker to grab your device to snoop on you.
- You are a well-known celebrity/politician/whatever and the person wants to copy your email, address, contact information for other celebrities, etc.
- You are a campaign worker for political party "A" with sensitive plans and someone from political party "B" would love to access your device.
- The TSA agent is a creep who thinks you're super hot and wants to check out your phone for pics.
Also, crimes are not necessarily wrong or evil. There are actions (like criticizing the government) that would be considered treason in authoritarian countries, but are fundamental rights in the free world.
Samsung's facial recognition actually cannot be fooled if you set it up correctly. Here is some information to read https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.an...-note-8-review-verging-on-perfection.html/amp :
Samsung has been at the forefront of mobile security for years, from its Knox sandboxing technology to the latest in biometric scanning tools. The Galaxy Note 8 adds in a facial recognition feature on top of all the other biometric scanning utilities on the device. This feature isn’t new to Android, but it’s something that hasn’t been revisited in years, and Samsung has rebuilt this feature to make it more secure. While they’ve been light on details, and despite some erroneous viral videos that have been floating around the web, it’s quite difficult to trick the phone into unlocking itself with a picture or video of a registered face; so long as the right checkboxes aren’t enabled of course.
By default Samsung enables the “faster recognition” feature, something many users might skip past without realizing it. Truth be told, I can’t figure out why in the world this would be a default setting, as the more secure method isn’t just more secure, it only takes a second or two to recognize my face, even in dark conditions. The “faster recognition” mode is easy to trick with a picture or video, and certainly makes it less of a security method than it should be. This feature shouldn’t even be available, given the speed and ease of unlocking when it’s not enabled, as it opens unnecessary security holes in an otherwise very secure phone.
Explain to me how a flat photo beats a 3D scan which is designed to map depth.
The commonality in all of is is you can just not read the site and not be spoiled about the details, like the general public.
Samsung's facial recognition actually cannot be fooled if you set it up correctly. Here is some information to read https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.an...-note-8-review-verging-on-perfection.html/amp :
Samsung has been at the forefront of mobile security for years, from its Knox sandboxing technology to the latest in biometric scanning tools. The Galaxy Note 8 adds in a facial recognition feature on top of all the other biometric scanning utilities on the device. This feature isn’t new to Android, but it’s something that hasn’t been revisited in years, and Samsung has rebuilt this feature to make it more secure. While they’ve been light on details, and despite some erroneous viral videos that have been floating around the web, it’s quite difficult to trick the phone into unlocking itself with a picture or video of a registered face; so long as the right checkboxes aren’t enabled of course.
By default Samsung enables the “faster recognition” feature, something many users might skip past without realizing it. Truth be told, I can’t figure out why in the world this would be a default setting, as the more secure method isn’t just more secure, it only takes a second or two to recognize my face, even in dark conditions. The “faster recognition” mode is easy to trick with a picture or video, and certainly makes it less of a security method than it should be. This feature shouldn’t even be available, given the speed and ease of unlocking when it’s not enabled, as it opens unnecessary security holes in an otherwise very secure phone.
Other people beg to differ https://www.forbes.com/sites/ianmor...nition-right-when-the-note-8-got-it-so-wrong/
http://fortune.com/2017/09/05/samsung-galaxy-note-8-security-fooled/
https://9to5mac.com/2017/09/05/iphone-8-face-recognition-samsung-galaxy-s8-note-8/
I do understand that nothing is full proof, but i think with "Face ID" it will be great, there have been a number of reports that say it's much faster, secure and reliable. We will see after today's keynote and the hands on people have with it, i'm not here to knock Samsung because their not Apple, i think in the last few years they have produced some really nice designs (S8 looks great) but i do think this is where Apple shines, taking time with something over many years to produce.
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/07/iph...-be-faster-and-more-secure-than-touch-id.html
https://9to5mac.com/2017/08/21/iphone-8-face-recognition-speed/
http://bgr.com/2017/07/13/iphone-8-features-3d-facial-recognition/
Hash collision are inevitable. What you're counting on is how likely are they to be. If it's a bio-metric scanner to launch nuclear weapons, I want it foll proof. If it's to protect my phone from random strangers, not so much. At that point i value speed more.
I'm talking about immediate safeguards in the field, not safeguards stopping warranted searches. The new Apple "cop button" in iOS11 is a good sign that Apple gets it.
3D cameras exist
even on the new Sony XZ1 phone
3d cameras surely exist, but the face is not flat like screen. Therefore any 3d picture cannot fool it.
And if it scans retina too, then even perfect mask would be useless