But it came out on the other side of the globe where today was actually yesterday.
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.
Facial Recognition Feature on Galaxy S8 Bypassed Using Just a Photo
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But it came out on the other side of the globe where today was actually yesterday.
Let's see him try to fool Facial Recognition with a picture from an iPhone screen.
This is a testament of great the S8 screen is.
Choi Gee-sung (Samsung mobile CEO), is that you??
Lol, "our devices are SO high-quality that they are insecure!!!".
Good one.
That's how monkey does it!
[doublepost=1491058167][/doublepost]
In his basement dungeon
No.
If someone registered their finger or nipple or big toe.... doesn't matter which, and then a PHOTO of that body part unlocked it; it would be the same situation.
I feel like you certainly must fathom the difference, yeah?
[doublepost=1491059059][/doublepost]
Then Samsung DEFINITELY would have saved face (pun unintentional) by making that knowledge public three days ago, when this story broke.
Great answer and what I think too; they're doing it for the neat factor rather that any real-world benefit.
Meanwhile, Apple's fingerprint ID is better than Android devices', and I expect that their other biometric ID features will be better as well. Hopefully the iPhone 8, or whatever they call it, can't get fooled by a smartphone's photo of the registered user!
Every law enforcement agency will want to crack Sammi's server now. Why would they not want voluntary mug shots, fingerprints and voice-print?
I hope so too!
It sounds like Window's "Hello" feature is pretty decent, as a byproduct of using two cameras to create a 3D facemapping... to me, this adds credence to the rumor of the 2017 iPhone having dual front cameras for this purpose- creating a high-res 3D facemap, useful in this security scenario, & hopefully for some entertaining/dynamic augmented reality features as well.
Face unlock without IR is considered a convenience and not security. Microsoft Windows Hello implementation of face unlock with IR is photo resistant. Samsung should've implemented it that way but it could be pre-production hardware and software that was tested.
On the other hand, fingerprint is also considered a convenience since it can be easily bypassed by a 6 year old child and also leaves a print that can be lifted and bypassed with fake.
http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/12/28/child-unlocks-sleeping-mom-iphone-using-thumb
As far as security, iris scanner > face unlock with IR or fingerprint scanner > face unlock without IR. Even stronger is MFA by using a combination of the above such as iris scanner + pin with rotating pad.
On the other hand, fingerprint is also considered a convenience since it can be easily bypassed by a 6 year old child and also leaves a print that can be lifted and bypassed with fake.
http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/12/28/child-unlocks-sleeping-mom-iphone-using-thumb
As far as security, iris scanner > face unlock with IR or fingerprint scanner > face unlock without IR. Even stronger is MFA by using a combination of the above such as iris scanner + pin with rotating pad.
Last edited:
No. Law enforcement cant do that in my State. Not unless the owner grants permission to access the phone contents OR the Officer obtains a search warrant to seize the phone and access the contents inside.
No Police Officer will/should ever force you to allow them access your phone without permission or under exigent circumstances.
Last edited:
it maybe in your country i understand
in India police don't even need any type of warrant to seize your phone, forget about phone you are just ripped 
Even easier to unlock with facial recognition, don't need to physically touch a person.
USCBP can and does already require people entering the US to unlock phones and give them their passwords, or be denied entry. They must admit Citizens, but they have been known to detain those who refuse to do so up to the maximum allowed under the law based on the circumstance. Facial recognition and Iris scanning would certainly make this even easier.
The only way Apple could make this more secure is the same way they make Touch ID more secure, which is to require a password after the phone has been powered down, or after inactivity for a period of time, and I suspect they will. That still doesn't solve the problem with USCBP, which can require your password, and a person to unlock the phone.
Actually, based on a 2014 case out of Virginia, they can. However, police cannot make you enter a code into your phone.
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/10...be-required-to-unlock-phone-with-fingerprint/
I do not agree with this judge's ruling but my opinion doesn't count for much, he is the one with the black robe. Police have always had the ability to "search" a suspect they detain for safety reasons (i.e. to make sure the person they are detaining or putting in the back seat of their vehicle isn't carrying a concealed weapon). Police routinely make suspects empty their pockets and they often go through a person's wallet to get their ID. Some officers decided on their own that their ability to "search" a suspect extended to searching a suspect's phone (call logs, voice mail, text messages, photos, etc.) and this has been challenged in court with seemingly contradictory rulings coming out of different courts.
The court cited in the WSJ article above decided that since police have the ability to collect a DNA sample (cheek swab) of a suspect, it makes sense that officers should have the ability to compel suspects to put their finger on their phone to unlock it (again, I adamantly disagree but that is irrelevant).
The practice of requiring suspects to unlock their phones so they could be searched was also challenged in another court. I don't recall the exact details but in that case the suspect had a pass code rather than finger print scanner and the judge ruled that the demand to unlock the phone was an "unreasonable search and seizure" because the purpose of the search is supposed to be for officer safety (i.e. look for hidden weapons) and that whatever may be on a phone is not a hidden weapon.
Welp. Samsung has done it again. Hears rumors of apple's plans, tries to beat them to it (copying), and failing. No surprise.
What difference does it make? What is the concern for someone using the convenience of face recognition to unlock their phone? A random thief on the street is not going to know who the phone belongs to, so being able to unlock the phone this way is sort of moot. The people for whom this would raise such concerns for are those whose friends or family might unlock the phone. People who have access to the phone and photos of the owner -- intimate close-up well lit photos of the kind that could be used to unlock the phone, not just random photos pulled from social media. And those are the same people who might have the kind of access to crack fingerprint readers, or swap an Apple Watch from a sleeping owners wrist to their own.
Bottom line, someone who really has something to hide, from even those closest to them should not use the most secure option available, and turn the others off.
Good point. USCBP can do that, I was thinking about routine traffic stops when I made my comment.
Why is this causing an outcry?
It's like saying the option to remove the password makes the phone unsecure.
If you want security, use the fingerprint sensor or the iris scanner?
It's like saying the option to remove the password makes the phone unsecure.
If you want security, use the fingerprint sensor or the iris scanner?
I don't want to derail the thread with PRSI, but I will just say this. The article you posted is NOT case law or amended under the Supreme Court and does NOT apply to all states. That was a Virginia ruling. It was never even passed according to that article, which also had the potential to be appealed under state law. So that really doesn't make much of a difference in Terms of law enforcement practices across the board.
And I'm telling you from experience, no police officer should make anyone unlock their phone without a warrant unless consent applies where a warrant isn't obtainable. If you have a community care taker doctrine or exigent circumstances apply, there is exceptions. But otherwise, get the warrant ethically to avoid any type of conflict or scrutiny that may follow there after. And I'm speaking for the state that I reside in based off training/standards and laws, which also departments have policy procedure manuals they have to follow accordingly based off Supreme Court ruling's. In your case, this article doesn't have a Supreme Court ruling and doesn't override what other state laws advocate.
Also the state I reside in, law-enforcement can conduct a LIMITED search through your wallet identify you. Which is a Supreme Court ruling under State Vs Flynn.
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/al-court-of-criminal-appeals/1117060.html
Thanks for the discussion though.
Last edited:
Touch ID is so fast that it unlocks the phone even if I am only trying to see the time. You have to hold the phone to use it, so why is facial recognition even needed?
[doublepost=1491064514][/doublepost]
Some people will think they don't need a password or other security measure?
[doublepost=1491064514][/doublepost]
Some people will think they don't need a password or other security measure?
This is a sign that Samsung still doesn't get Apple's fundamental philosophy. They are still playing the throw crap at the wall and see what sticks game. Apple would only release facial recognition if it worked at least reasonably well. They'd use 2 cameras for depth and invent some creative new algorithms to make it reliable. It would probably not be as secure as a fingerprint, but it would be a viable alternative if you valued convenience over security. The sad thing is that Samsung know the throwing crap at the wall approach works. Most consumers are not very discerning and large parts of the press are clueless about technology. If Apple do debut an amazing facial recognition technology, half the press will slam them for copying Samsung. Which is ironic, as the crappy week-long facial recognition project they mustered up for this phone was probably spurred by an Apple rumor.