Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Touch ID enhances my security. It encouraged me to lock the screen sooner, rather than later, because it makes it much easier for me to re-enter the device.

When it comes to validating identity, fingerprints are more secure than passcodes and PINs. Someone can see/video me keying-in a passcode, whereas, short of a Mission: Impossible scenario, nobody but I has my fingerprint. I'd much rather use Touch ID (via Apple Pay) to validate my identity at an ATM machine or credit card terminal (or even open my iPhone in my girlfriend's presence) than key in a PIN number or passcode in a public place.

The people who have the greatest opportunity to peek at the contents of my iPhone are people I know, not strangers. They're not going to be faking my fingerprints, or holding a gun to my head to obtain the passcode. If they're threatening to break up with me unless I fork over my passcode, then I'm probably much better off single. Bottom line, if I leave my iPhone or computers unattended, I don't want them to get in, and Touch ID is more than enough to keep them out. I wish I had Touch ID on my Macs - typing passwords after every trip to the bathroom is a drag.

The fact is, iPhone has a layered defense system. In the case of simple loss or theft, I can also change my iCloud password, use Find My iPhone to remote erase the thing... If it was stolen by someone capable of creating a fake fingerprint... I could have it wiped before they could get in. My passcode/fingerprint is not my sole line of defense.

But if they held a gun to my head (or a knife to my fingers) and demanded my passcode or fingerprint (kidnapping, rather than simple theft)? I'd let 'em in. There's nothing in there worth sacrificing either my life or my touch-typing abilities. I'm not rich, famous, or privy to secret plans. I routinely delete my selfies. Yawn!
 
Touch ID is only as secure as the passcode in that if Touch ID is mis-authenticated several times, the passcode is then required (which is what you are saying).

That is not the least bit true, nor what I'm saying. The Passcode is ALWAYS available as the PRIMARY method of entry.

Touch ID is not security.
 
I think its a security component as it locks out anyone who's not authorized to use my phone.
 
Pretty secure for general use. The only thing I would be worried about is a snooping partner (gf/bf/wife/husband) who uses your thumb while you are asleep.
At that point there are bigger problems at hand....so to speak....
[doublepost=1458825982][/doublepost]
1. How secure is touch ID?

2. Do you use it or use a text or swipe password? Why do you use what you use?

Thanks for answering! :)
It's secure enough for personal use and for the my agency in the U.S. Federal government. It's in use with our Good Technology mobile management solution.
 
I think its a security component as it locks out anyone who's not authorized to use my phone.
Sigh. No, it doesn't. If it were the only means of authenticating access to your phone? Then yes it would be. But its not. It is just a brilliant, speedy, and convenient way of bypassing your own Passcode. It is a genius feature, but at no point should people labor under the delusion that Touch ID = security, until the day a Passcode is not required.
 
  • Like
Reactions: canuckRus
Sigh. No, it doesn't. If it were the only means of authenticating access to your phone? Then yes it would be.
That's my point, a thief grabs my phone they won't easily have access to my details. Can they crack it, perhaps but most thieves are looking for quick hit.
[doublepost=1458826460][/doublepost]Think of it this way, a front door has a lock, it can easily be picked by professionals, yet it is considered a security feature.
 
Maybe this was already said and I missed it but with regard to police/FBI/law and Touch ID....

"When police make an arrest, there are constitutional protections in place to prevent the police from forcing a confession. Per the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination, a person who has been arrested may legally refuse to speak to the police. The right to be free from self-incrimination specifically applies to knowledge that the arrested person can communicate.....Per the US Supreme Court, one cannot be compelled to provide testimonial content to law enforcement. However, fingerprints, by the nature of their availability and the fact that they do not constitute testimonial content, do not implicate the Fifth Amendment’s right to be free from self-incrimination."

So if you get arrested police/FBI/law can use Touch ID to open your phone without any issue.
 
Is TouchID BY ITSELF more secure than a passcode BY ITSELF, sure, but TocuhID doesn't exist BY ITSELF; it's a shortcut for a passcode. The passcode is still there as a fallback, and more importantly, as a BYPASS to TouchID. This, I believe, is @TurboPGT! 's point. Because a passcode is still the last line of defense, our phones aren't any safer requiring a fingerprint. It's not technically any safer or more secure.

HOWEVER, @TurboPGT! , what you're failing to mention is that TouchID DOES make the average iPhone safer/more secure in a practical sense: bc TouchID is so very convenient to setup and so painless to use, many people have TouchID enabled that otherwise wouldn't use a passcode or have 1234, 0000, etc. as their passcode. In this sense, enabling TouchID CAN make phones more secure.

Does that all make sense?
 
Yesterday I watched a student try and access my telephone using Siri and then inputting a special place name into a weather provider. Not sure exactly how this worked. He couldn't get into my iPhone 6s+ but did succeed in breaking into another students iPhone 6.
 
Maybe this was already said and I missed it but with regard to police/FBI/law and Touch ID....

"When police make an arrest, there are constitutional protections in place to prevent the police from forcing a confession. Per the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination, a person who has been arrested may legally refuse to speak to the police. The right to be free from self-incrimination specifically applies to knowledge that the arrested person can communicate.....Per the US Supreme Court, one cannot be compelled to provide testimonial content to law enforcement. However, fingerprints, by the nature of their availability and the fact that they do not constitute testimonial content, do not implicate the Fifth Amendment’s right to be free from self-incrimination."

So if you get arrested police/FBI/law can use Touch ID to open your phone without any issue.
Correct.

Ironically, 5th amendment currently protects pass codes but not biometric data. This may change, but it's currently what is being accepted, as we wait for laws to catch up to reality.
 
Maybe this was already said and I missed it but with regard to police/FBI/law and Touch ID....

"When police make an arrest, there are constitutional protections in place to prevent the police from forcing a confession. Per the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination, a person who has been arrested may legally refuse to speak to the police. The right to be free from self-incrimination specifically applies to knowledge that the arrested person can communicate.....Per the US Supreme Court, one cannot be compelled to provide testimonial content to law enforcement. However, fingerprints, by the nature of their availability and the fact that they do not constitute testimonial content, do not implicate the Fifth Amendment’s right to be free from self-incrimination."

So if you get arrested police/FBI/law can use Touch ID to open your phone without any issue.

If I don't commit a crime, I don't need to worry about this. If I commit a crime, I've made some stupid decisions. If I've made stupid decisions, I've got no one to blame but myself.
If I'm arrested and I'm innocent, I would want information to come out right away.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AZhappyjack
If I don't commit a crime, I don't need to worry about this. If I commit a crime, I've made some stupid decisions. If I've made stupid decisions, I've got no one to blame but myself.
Those who don't stand up for or defend their rights, don't deserve to have them in the first place.

While I agree that I have little to worry about, as I am a law-abiding citizen, your sentiments and those similar to it pave the way for police states run by Big Brother.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -B. Franklin
 
Those who don't stand up for or defend their rights, don't deserve to have them in the first place.

While I agree that I have little to worry about, as I am a law-abiding citizen, your sentiments and those similar to it pave the way for police states run by Big Brother.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -B. Franklin
Oh that quote gets dusted off and posted every single time this conversation comes around.
First, Bejamin Franklin didn't have a smartphone so he didn't know what was possible and what the regulations and technologies would be in forensics.
Second, Benjamin Franklin would want due process as quickly as possible.
Third, I have a right to due process as quickly as possible. As an innocent person, since I have not commited murder nor bought/sold/used drugs nor have connections to terrorist organisations, nor evade my taxes, I would want my innocence to be evident as soon as possible.
 
Oh that quote gets dusted off and posted every single time this conversation comes around.
First, Bejamin Franklin didn't have a smartphone so he didn't know what was possible and what the regulations and technologies would be in forensics.
Second, Benjamin Franklin would want due process as quickly as possible.
Third, I have a right to due process as quickly as possible. As an innocent person, since I have not commited murder nor bought/sold/used drugs nor have connections to terrorist organisations, nor evade my taxes, I would want my innocence to be evident as soon as possible.

As would I, but that assumes due process in an ideal scenario.

I have close, personal friends who are police officers, detectives, and state troopers, but that doesn't mean every law enforcement officer is "good" or always makes "good" decisions, and in the heat of the moment, I don't want a desperate officer having the right to demand something of me that is personal and private.

I am conservative by every definition of the word and am no alarmist, but I also know to never trust human nature.
 
I use alphanumeric passcode everywhere. On iPhone 4, iPad 1, iPad mini, iPhone 6 Plus, and now iPhone 6s Plus. Touch ID is awesome, especially 6s plus one. But I still protect myself with a strong password.
They support each other, but not tend to replace each other. A strong passcode is still a good defence of our own data.
 
I don't have a smartphone (yet) but my iPad Pro has fingerprint ID. I set it up, but it often takes several tries before it recognizes my finger, and often ends up demanding that I enter my passcode. I've quit using the fingerprint ID and just entering my passcode instead. The fingerprint ID was more hassle to use than just entering the passcode from the beginning.
 
I don't have a smartphone (yet) but my iPad Pro has fingerprint ID. I set it up, but it often takes several tries before it recognizes my finger, and often ends up demanding that I enter my passcode. I've quit using the fingerprint ID and just entering my passcode instead. The fingerprint ID was more hassle to use than just entering the passcode from the beginning.
It improves with time.

Perhaps your finger was dirty when you set it up initially?

If you always use the same finger (or two) set the same finger up as separate fingers in the TouchID settings. This helps from my experience.
 
Pretty secure for general use. The only thing I would be worried about is a snooping partner (gf/bf/wife/husband) who uses your thumb while you are asleep.
If you're concerned your partner would do that they shouldn't be your partner.

He might have been joking, but my first thought was of college dorm mates. Oh man did we use to play tricks on sleeping people. heh heh

If TouchId had been around back then, there's not a doubt in the world that we would have tried using it on some poor sucker :D

Those have been proven fairly true in extenuating circumstances, but for non-Apple devices. The reality of spoofing prints for Apple devices is EXTREMELY slim-to-none.

It is hardly slim to none. Plenty of YouTube videos show people spoofing TouchID on their first attempt with a print they made from easily obtainable materials.

Just because the methods seem difficult to you, does not make it seem difficult to those of us with circuit board or modeling experience. Or anyone with the ability to follow instructions.
 
It is hardly slim to none. Plenty of YouTube videos show people spoofing TouchID on their first attempt with a print they made from easily obtainable materials.

Just because the methods seem difficult to you, does not make it seem difficult to those of us with circuit board or modeling experience.

You do realize that with your casual qualifier there, you just eliminated 95% or so of the population, right? Then you throw in the circumstance with which one would want to spoof a TouchID. Then you throw in those materials. Then you throw in obtaining an actual fingerprint. The chances have now decreased to "slim-to-none."

I'm not saying that if someone had the prints of a "target" and the phone of a "target" and the knowledge and the materials that it would be difficult, but I am saying that when you put it all together, it's fairly far-fetched (and definitely much more so than the Samsung/Huawei example with an ink-jet printer).
 
You don't find graphite impregnated silicone thumb with a scanned fingerprint in a TV show with a huge budget and dozens of years of experience an extenuating circumstance?

No. It has been done by plenty of bloggers at home.

There are multiple methods, from using graphite & latex, to gelatin, to simple wood glue and spit. Cost using your own decent printer: about $20 max in materials. Less depending on what you have laying around.


Cost using a Brother printer model that can use a very special conductive cartridge: $260 for ink and paper.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.