Did you read the story or just the headline? When the user placed the screen protector on, she setup/registered her finger and the scanner scanned the screen protector, not her finger. So the screen protector is there all the time, so of course it would unlock.
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.
Samsung Admits Major Security Flaw in Galaxy S10 Under-Screen Fingerprint Sensor
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Did you read the story or just the headline? When the user placed the screen protector on, she setup/registered her finger and the scanner scanned the screen protector, not her finger. So the screen protector is there all the time, so of course it would unlock.
Your optimism is misplaced. The example given in the article showed multiple non-owners unlocking the phone, so unless the ridges are permanently impressed in the protector (which is honestly worse), it is just being sloppy.
The user setup the finger print scanner to scan her screen protector not her finger.
Certainly some might prefer a slower less seamless method to unlock a device but that is certainly a very small minority.
Shouldn’t this read “your identical twins”, “taped glasses PUT ON THE OWNERS OF THE PHONE WHILE THEY ARE SLEEP WITHOUT THEM NOTICING” and “extremely realistic and expensive 3D masks that needs high fidelity scans of the phone owner that are virtually impossible to take without the owner noticing”?
They would have to put on a screen protector AND register the screen protector first
You would also have to go through the setup process and scan the screen protector first.
Not sure why you keep making these posts but they are wrong.
[automerge]1571332999[/automerge]
No.
And the scanner scanned the under side of the screen protector, not her finger.
Not sure if Samsung really admitted that their phone is flawed. But if they did, I commend them for having the courage to admit it. Compare to Apple that keeps saying that only “a small number of users” are affected when in reality, the issue is more widespread.
I don't think people are actually grasping what happened here lol. It's not like you can just go unlock literally any S10 by throwing a screen protector on it. Most of them already have a screen protector on them, so why can't you go unlock them?
You can't tell me that someone JUST figured out that if you walk to up any of the 30 S10s you see in a day with screen protectors and pick it up, you can unlock it. That's just not what happened here. Something was read by the phone when setting up the fingerprints that persisted after this screen protector was applied, so all touches looked like the fingerprint. It's not like it's an issue that's impacting every S10 out there.
edit - actually just reread again. So this woman bought an S10 (says it's hers), and put a screen protector on it. Then used her finger and her husbands finger to unlock the phone that hadn't been protected by a finger print yet. These phones aren't locked by fingerprints until you scan your fingerprint. Pressing your finger on the screen doesn't even attempt to unlock it if it's not locked by a fingerprint. Sounds like she was just "unlocking" an unlocked phone. Right? There's nothing to unlock if you haven't locked it yet lol
You can't tell me that someone JUST figured out that if you walk to up any of the 30 S10s you see in a day with screen protectors and pick it up, you can unlock it. That's just not what happened here. Something was read by the phone when setting up the fingerprints that persisted after this screen protector was applied, so all touches looked like the fingerprint. It's not like it's an issue that's impacting every S10 out there.
edit - actually just reread again. So this woman bought an S10 (says it's hers), and put a screen protector on it. Then used her finger and her husbands finger to unlock the phone that hadn't been protected by a finger print yet. These phones aren't locked by fingerprints until you scan your fingerprint. Pressing your finger on the screen doesn't even attempt to unlock it if it's not locked by a fingerprint. Sounds like she was just "unlocking" an unlocked phone. Right? There's nothing to unlock if you haven't locked it yet lol
Last edited:
If you want to equate one kind of battery failure that requires replacement after maybe 2.5 years to have decent battery life with one that causes fire after mere weeks, you're just making it clear that you are not interested in an honest debate.
I just thought so after hearing this. Long before S10 came for the market, there were speculation about S10 not accepting screen protectors due to Ultrasonic Fingerprint readers in it. I think the speculation that lousy screen protectors probably causing the issue...due to persisting fingerprint marks at the time of applying the screen protector. Hence this is probably not a security threat like cloud servers get hacked by teenagers across the continent for fun and take all personal information of the customers thinking that they are paying heavily for privacy!
The process which occurred was :-
Phone is set up with Fingerprint
Unapproved case is fitted
Fingerprint is no longer recognised
User opens phone with passcode, goes into settings and a new fingerprint is setup.
The fitted case screen is not thin, and had a gap between it and the phone screen resulting in a vague image whereby other fingerprints could be seen as acceptable.