"which speeds up the Face ID process and unlocks your iPhone X faster". Do you really think that this is not about the speed? Just think about it. Even if the sensor and the software needed for attention detection is as fast as the 3D scan, for the sensor to see your eyes state one needs to position the phone in front of the eyes. And this takes time. 3D detection does not need it. That would explain the reports that Google's version of face id is faster and works at wider angles.
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.
Google Pixel 4's Face Unlock Feature Works With Eyes Closed, Sparking Security Concerns
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The M1 (not the U1 you mentioned earlier), is the always-on motion co-processor, and is used to detect even small motions of the phone, allowing the LED dot array to be turned on before the screen is touched.
While there are many uses for this system, in this discussion, it is being used to activate the illuminators before the screen is touched.
Of course it is faster, but no one will notice because it was never slow.....unless you are wearing sunglasses. Both articles you referenced stated that explicitly. You are talking about a difference of nano or milliseconds in normal use. I've tested toggling attention required on and off 5 times today. There is no noticeable difference. Period.
Last edited:
You’re the one who doesn’t get it. If it reads your fingerprint in 3D then no screen protector should ever fool it. It should simply fail to unlock because it didn’t get an accurate reading of your print to match with the version stored on the phone. The fact it unlocks shows there’s a serious flaw in how it reads your prints.
The default behavior of any biometric that doesn’t obtain a highly accurate version of your finger (or face) should be to deny access, not to say “close enough, it’s probably the owner” and unlock anyway.
I wear regular glasses and also have prescription sunglasses. I’ve never noticed any difference in how my iPhone works with either pair of glasses (or no glasses).
With screen protector (with holes) the sensor does not read or register the fingerprint, it can only see the wholes (in 3D) and the hole pattern does not change from finger to finger. It is a secure device when used properly but of course Samsung have to update their software to reject fingerprint registration with the obstacle present.
"used properly" means only Samsung approved screen protectors.
So no, it is not a secured device if not using "approved" screen protectors.
I think we are done here.
“I know my Pixel so well I can unlock it in my sleep!”
I do not argue, I offer them Premium Technical Support for $19.99/mo and wish them well. My job is not Apple Evangelist but Internet Technical Support.
[automerge]1571534321[/automerge]
I use a VPN, and do not use any Google apps other than Waze which I only share location while running the app.
Wow, you’re so far off base on this it’s not even funny.
Have you even seen the demo videos of this? This is how one user did it:
- User registers their thumb print without a screen protector.
- They unlock with the thumb to show it works.
- They try a different finger and it won’t unlock.
- They place a plastic case on the screen and after only two tries, the finger unlocks the phone.
I suspect that what is happening is that the finger was registered with the screen protector on? If so, then the hashed feature vector probably ends up being something very sparse - imagine “0000000000000010000”
Then whenever any finger touches it, from anyone, it creates a new hashed feature vector, say “0000000001000000000.” And it says “yeah, close enough.”
Because the software is too dumb to reject the registered finger feature vector as being unrealistic/too simple.
If they are truly registering WITHOUT the protector, then I have no idea how one would write software that ******.
Question for you. You use a VPN and use no Google apps and I assume, please excuse me if I'm wrong, no social media apps. Do you feel that you are a typical Iphone user?
Why is anyone training the finger print scanner with the under side of a screen protector?
They didn’t just admit it unlocks with the eyes closed; they featured it in ads, I think at the launch. They reckon it is faster that way. True, lowering security standards is convenient and makes for faster operation. Microsoft made that mistake once.
Good use of weasel words there on something that is untrue. As for your second assertion, source?
It’s funny as I don’t know how any body can defend this as being anything but a security nightmare
It seems no different to Samsung’s own facial recognition
Wow your ignorance is astounding. I should‘ve known I was reading garbage when I saw this post was liked by macfacts, another conveyor of falsehoods.
Given that, due to press coverage Google are now going to change this to either require eye-open "Attention" or give you the option to have this turned on or off.
This whole story is now a non issue.
Personally I hope they put in a toggle switch so that, unlike Apple, Pixel owners will have the choice.
Problem solved, nothing to see here, move along people
This whole story is now a non issue.
Personally I hope they put in a toggle switch so that, unlike Apple, Pixel owners will have the choice.
Problem solved, nothing to see here, move along people
Apple do give you the option to have required attention on or not and no it’s not nothing to see until they fix the issueGiven that, due to press coverage Google are now going to change this to either require eye-open "Attention" or give you the option to have this turned on or off.
This whole story is now a non issue.
Personally I hope they put in a toggle switch so that, unlike Apple, Pixel owners will have the choice.
Problem solved, nothing to see here, move along people
I do Facebook from a computer only as I run marketing campaigns for businesses. I am most definitely not a typical iPhone user, I’ve managed security for multiple publishers over the years so have tried to always protect my own privacy.
Motion co processors on iPhones incorporate sensors like gyroscope, barometer, accelerometer, compass etc.
It can detect all kinds of motions but in the context or phisycal touch or manipulation of the phone.
You said it yourself "detect even small motions of the phone, allowing the LED dot array to be turned on".
So I still don't understand this claim that it can replicate the principle of how Soli chip works on the Pixel 4.
I honestly can't replicate it, I move my hand close to the iphone x and nothing happens. I have to tap on the screen or pick up the phone to have it turn on.
Well I think we have reached limitations of affordable, broadly available tech in smart devices. In 2007 when iPhone launched, there were so many new things never seen in a ‘phone’ yet so many other things not yet seen that have subsequently been added by either Apple or Android hardware manufacturers.
If I’m honest, every major Apple product that launches is pretty exciting. I’m already excited for the next iPad Pro. Some people probably think that there’s no reason I should be excited for Apple product launches but it comes down to one thing for me: Every Apple product I use works well and improves productivity for me in some way. I genuinely enjoy using my iPhone, my Apple Watch, my iPad Pro, my MacBook Pro, my AppleTV and my AirPods. So when a new version of any of those comes out, I’m excited.
Yes raise to wake will awake the phone and authenticate immediately. I turned it on to test, but normally it’s off.