[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Most people I know that are getting one... are getting them for the "pretty" colors.

[AnimalPak200]

Most people I know that are getting one... are getting them for the "pretty" colors.

F*k colors, GOLD IS BEST, BEST, BEST!

On another note, the fact that it is susceptible to (basically) a 'photo attack' is really sad, given the almost 20 years of research/technology in the fingerprint recognition field devoted entirely to prevent this.

I don't think Apple took it very seriously, and if anything, it will only serve to push biometrics further into the 'gimmick' realm within the popular view.

Posted via CB10

[axeman1000]

If it's not using BES then the traffic is exactly the same as with an iPhone or Android. The encryption is determined by whatever is on the other end of the connection.

The networking course I took about packets and encryption Woud tell me different, but you believe what you need to.

Posted via CB10

[Mr. Marco]

I wouldn't call this a hack. It's a way to defeat fingerprint scanners in general, not just Apple's. Your average phone thief wouldn't be doing this anyways. It would be an individual or group that are specifically out to do it and have all the tools and time to do it.

[xandermac]

On another note, the fact that it is susceptible to (basically) a 'photo attack' is really sad, given the almost 20 years of research/technology in the fingerprint recognition field devoted entirely to prevent this.

If you really think you could be the target of an attack like this, you should never have a phone of any kind as none will be safe from that kind of attacker.

Com'on people, think "real world" rather than fantasy land speculation.

[AnimalPak200]

If you really think you could be the target of an attack like this, you should never have a phone of any kind as none will be safe from that kind of attacker.

Com'on people, think "real world" rather than fantasy land speculation.

That's not the point, the point is that fingerprint recognition is a very mature field, and this implementation doesn't seem to reflect that.

My guess is that they will add the ability for a user to set the matching threshold (maybe it already has that?). Those needing greater security will be able to set it higher even if it means they may have to reposition their finger a couple of times to unlock. Once you increase the amount of finger print that is needed for a positive match, the chances of a hacker finding enough of a fingerprint drops dramatically.

Posted via CB10

[tk-093]

I still see it as a pretty neat feature. Check out this article. It's a year old so the numbers could be off, but like 1 in 10 don't even put a password on their tablets and 1 out of 3 do not on their smartphones.

This is a good way to add a small level of security (way better then having nothing at all.) to a bigger audience. Who cares if it is the ultimate security or not. Business is still going to be enforcing PIN/Passwords anyway.

[Disfunktion]

Still think its easier to point a knife to someone and make them unlock their phone instead of doing this.

[venious]

The best biometrics is a tongue print. Fingers are so 19th century.

Btw, anyone remember Apple's voice password on MacOS 8? My voice is my password...crap.

Posted via CB10

[Richard Buckley]

The networking course I took about packets and encryption Woud tell me different, but you believe what you need to.

Posted via CB10

Really, what course is that? And what encryption? Since we're talking open Wi-Fi the only encryption would be that applied by the end points.

Posted via CB10

[axeman1000]

Really, what course is that? And what encryption? Since we're talking open Wi-Fi the only encryption would be that applied by the end points.

Posted via CB10

Exactly, but the packets are still encrypted at some form even at the lowest level, and never you worry about my course, I make a comfortable enough living with it thanks.