Slashdot Mirror
Fingerprint Scanners Still Easy to Fool
Anlan writes "A Swedish student wrote her Master's thesis about current fingerprint technology. After a thorough literature study some live testing took place. Simple DIY fingerprint copies were used (detailed how-to in the thesis). Have current commercial products improved as much as proponents claim? Well, this qoute from the abstract says it all: 'The experiments focus on making artificial fingerprints in gelatin from a latent fingerprint. Nine different systems were tested at the CeBIT trade fair in Germany and all were deceived. Three other different systems were put up against more extensive tests with three different subjects. All systems were circumvented with all subjects' artificial fingerprints, but with varying results.' You can guess how happy the sales people at CeBIT were - most systems claim to be spoof proof..."
So, will they remove these fingerprint scanners, in the US Internaitonal Airport ?
Trolling using another account since 2005.
Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!
Please remember this the next time a non-productive "feature" is uncovered.
Don't let your fingerprints get copied. Wear gloves ALL the time. Problem solved.
Hmmm.
That's great to know that some of the world's most sophisticated security systems can be circumvented with Jell-O
make sure not to touch your car much or leave it parked in the same place too long.
An easy way to fix this, although I am no expert, is to make the fingerprint scanners heat sensitive. If the fingerprint matches and is within 1 degree of 98.6 F, then it opens. I think that would prevent people from holding a thing of gelatin against it, and it would prevent people from holding a lighter under it, because it has to be within 1 degree. It's not a flawless way to fix it, but it would make it at least a bit more difficult to foil, neh?
Help! I'm being repressed!
"I'll show you a finger, Trebek!"
- SNL Celebrity Jeopardy
Think of the simple RSA keyfob some of us carry; it gives us a number and we use that PLUS a password to get into secure systems (have + know).
Carry this one step further and have the system check your fingerprint/handprint/iris/whatever PLUS ask for a password.
I personally think it's damn scary in this age of terrorism that someone could fake a biometric and get onto a plane; if the airlines for example issued me a unique password to go along with fingerprint (or whatever) recognition then I'd feel a whole bunch better about the entire process and the underlying technologies.
I'm going to try it. get myself arrested, etc. etc. might rob a bank....
--cros13
..the passports to be changed yet again, to have "better", "smart" fingerprint recognition/imprinting techniques?
http://efil.blogspot.com/
These have been, and probably always will be easy to fool. If anyone needs ultra-high security, it's doubtful that they'd choose this form of biometrics to begin with, unless they themselves are foolish.
As is true with any security measure, if it can br beaten, the geeks will find a way.
and always will be. If they could fool the proper scanners than that would be a surprise. Why would you do your master on this? It's like saying that cheap cars are less reliable than luxary ones. Thank you Captiain Obvious.
While it may be true that your fingerprints are unique, even the fingerprint checking systems used by the police produce a lot of false matches. But this is only a minor problem. You can replace this with DNA testing or an iris scan.
The big problem is that it takes so long for the test to be completed adequately. The only way to speed things up would be to have a single card that has all this data stored on it. this could be read directly by a computer, and processed in considerably less time.
From the document abstract... "A description of different liveness detection methods is presented and discussed. Methods requiring extra hardware use temperature, pulse, blood pressure, electric resistance, etc., and methods using already existent information in the system use skin deformation, pores, perspiration, etc."
Who cares about the scanners when the real problem lies in something entirely different?
People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
For the Swedish bikkinni team anway, should use other "appendages" to authenticate the message.
Just wanted to interject... I suppose it depends on whether you have one that bounces small radio signals off of the inside of your finger or one that simply captures an image. Certain fingerprint readers bounce radio signals off of the inside of your finger and read the underlying tissue structure (no, I'm not going to plug the product here). This prevents people from doing what she did at the trade convention. Fingerprint technology is always improving, and I'm sure that the industry will take this to heart and make these things even more complex. When you get right down to it, the systems aren't as complex as you might think. Most fingerplate templates weigh in from anywhere to 300 - 600 bytes in size.. but that is more to ease hardware requirements. I think they will combine other methods in the fingerprint taking process and eliminate these problems. Just my take on it, tear it apart guys ;)
A light spray of hydrochloric acid could be used to clean the hands before a scan is performed.
I believe c't magazine successfully fooled more than 50% of scanners by placing a clear plastic bag, filled with water, on top of the glass. This makes the greasy residue of the genuine user's fingerprint show up clearly to the scanner.
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
What about all the oil from fingerprints. Do the replicas have oil as well in order to leave an actual fingerprint on the system or does it just scan the pattern of print like a flatbed scanner?
GroupShares Inc. - A Free and Interactive Stock Trading Community
-------
artlu.net
wasn't this same thing done in a james bond movie from the about the early 80's?
I seem to remember him picking off some fake fingerprints he used to pick up a wineglass with at some womans place (who 'gasp' turned out to be a spy for the 'other' side..)
anime+manga together at last.. in real time.
If its so easy to falsify fingerprints then they will want more. Say hello to have a DNA sample taken at birth to be used as ID for the rest of your monitored exixtence.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
Most fingerprint scanners have the tech. to measure if the substance scanned is real skin or not, based on the surface resistance, so latex copies don't work at all. It's a wonder most of these devices at these trade shows still can't do this. Pretty embarrasing really.
thank goodness for that - after all, it's next to impossible to use someone elses card.
reminds me of one of the h2g2 books in some way . . .
People have been fooling fingerprint and ocular scanners for years. It's going to take the next quantum-leap in sensing technology to render artifical fingerprints less effective.
One of the 187.
From the thesus...
The main problem with liveness detection methods based on extra hardware, is that the scanners have to be adjusted to operate e±ciently in different kinds of environments, leading to problems when using a wafer-thin artifcial fingerprint glued on to a live finger.
And finally, monsieur, a wafer-thin fingerprint. Oh sir...it's only wafer thin.
Human-sized gas chromatograph.
The subject to be scanned would be analyzed in a gas chromatograph. It is highly unlikely that anyone would be able to reliably spoof your spectra. It could even be used to tell if you were on drugs or needed to lose some weight.
While it may be true that your fingerprints are unique, even the fingerprint checking systems used by the police produce a lot of false matches. But this is only a minor problem. You can replace this with DNA testing or an iris scan.
AFIS (Automated Fingerprint ID Systems) are pretty good at matching. Instead of saying "this is the person you're looking for", it gives a weight and gives the top possible matches. It's still up to a human (or humans) to make the final determination that the fingerprint in the database and the one provided by the police is the same.
In the case of the Oregon lawyer who was thought to be connected to the Madrid bombings, the source image provided to the FBI was of inferior quality. In addition, there are questions that the humans were biased looking at that person's record. In that case, it wasn't the AFIS that failed, it was the human element that failed.
IIRC, identical twins have the same DNA. So far, no two people have been proven to have the same fingerprints.
is to use a retina scanning devices instead. After all it is much harder to remove a persons eyeball than it is their finger. No sig required
What does liveness detection have to do with the problem of a twin/clone having similar fingerprints? Unless your twin/clone is dead I can't see how it would make a difference.
Lasers Controlled Games!
but what are the changes that can evolve with the retina? deterioration/separation and other abstracts that will change?
they may not work for me. I have a chemical burn on three of my fingers on my right hand. It still hasn't healed properly and the scar tissue keeps rearanging itself (small blisters keep forming). My other hobby, wood carving, leaves me with several fresh cuts on my hands and fingers each week, from these I can see changes in my prints.
I used to have a cool sig, back when I cared
Plug the product... I would be interested to find out who is doing this type of research and looking up documentation on how it works if possible. Sounds interesting. Post as AC or something :)
Hmmm.
AFIS (Automated Fingerprint ID Systems) are pretty good at matching. Instead of saying "this is the person you're looking for", it gives a weight and gives the top possible matches. It's still up to a human (or humans) to make the final determination that the fingerprint in the database and the one provided by the police is the same.
That's kinda the problem. It's fine for police investigations, since it's worth the effort of a human poring over the information, but for security, I don't like the idea that someone may have a fingerprint that's a good enough match to get into my car.
after doing long hours of cleaning at home, one of my finger seems to be "too smooth" after soaked in the chemical water, even I wore gloves, there's still plenty got into it, now I have 1-2 fingers which barely have any fingerprint.
I am really worried now.
In a former career I spent time mixing cement. One day I was mixing a small amount in a 5 gallon bucket. At the time I had nothing to mix it with so I used my hand. After mixing I washed my hand and it was amazingly smooth. I didn't think much more about it. The next day the skin on my hand was very sore. I looked at it and noticed that the mixing had worn down the top layes of skin on my hand. To the point where I barely had any fingerprints at all. So if you want to remove your fingerprints temporarily in a somewhat painful(but not excruciating) way, just mix up a bucket of concrete with your hand..... Hmmmm, is this a circumvention device?
mp3's are only for those with bad memories
No, No, NO, NO, *NO*...
NEVER EVER have data used for authentication physically ON the security token...
The black hats just write their own details to a card and have done with it.
You should only have an identifier on the card that is used only for keying a record from a (supposedly) secure database.
This identifier should be used nowhere else, so as to limit the data exposed if a card falls into the wrong hands.
... defeating fingerprint scans is a lot harder than stealing a PIN.
There is an old saying that is attributed to the Secret Service. They can't stop someone really dedicated from killing the President. All they can do is raise the level of difficulty so high that the average individual won't be able to do it. I think that is applicable to the fingerprint scanners used in American airports. Yes, they can be beat, but they raise the threshold. They won't catch the dedicated/educated terrorists, but it will help against idiots. And stopping idiot terrorists is still a good idea. And don't fool yourselves, a lot of terrorists are idiots. Just look at the Shoe Bomber, not what I would call England's best and brightest.
Good thing this was written by a student who is NOT a US citizen or she would probably be prosecuted under the DMCA.
sudo eat my shorts
At one or two of the DSD's field sites, they use hand scanners - pretty cool to watch at night - laser light show - in combination with a 4 digit pin number. Amusingly, the pin numbers are not secret, (printed on ID cards), and yes, using your hand with someone elses code 'frequently' works just fine.
:-)
I'm not certain about eye scanners, though the current generation of fingerprint scanners will not be used, ever. Article says it all.
Digital safe keypads, they are everywhere, just look for the same 4 digits worn away from frequent useage, guess code combination accordingly
DIY fingerprint copies were used (detailed how-to in the thesis).
Instructions:
1) Find person who has legitimate access and follow him into the parking lot.
2) Club person over the head and cut off his finger.
3) Place severed finger on photocopier and make a copy.
4) Place photocopy of severed finger on fingerprint scanner - access granted!
They can also tell if you ate a big mean bean burrito for lunch.
I wonder.. would it be more secure to authenticate using a DNS sample, such as a simple finger scraping mechanism that will take a sample from your first layer of skin without actually harming you or causing discomfort? Granted, standard computers would have to be much, much faster ( on the order of 50x faster) to process this data in real time, but is it feasible?
Listen to my experimental-industrial-techno!
-Benjamin Meyer
Do you changes clothes while making the "chee-chee-cha-cha-choh" transformation sound?
I have the most advanced fingerprint verification system to date. Of course you sacrifice speed for acuracy.. and you have to pay a "subscription" of $15/hour or more.. You take an old guy with a magnefying glass, a scrubbrush, soap , a flipboard (with face/thumb/Barcode),a and barcode reader and you tell him he won't get paid if he doesn't look and verify and log EVERY person that comes through (verified against a card swipe lock)... and he sits in a chair behind floor-to-ceiling bulletproof glass... Subjects put their hand through a hole in the window, where he can scrub the thumb prior to checking. Drawbacks? Plenty! Sure, plenty... but I guaruntee none of the exploits in the article would work.
meh
According to the gas chromatograph, the secret ingredient is... love? Hey, who's been screwing with this thing?
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
Just thought I'd mention it. :) The story also had "heavy water fusion batteries" 4 years before the world learned the term "cold fusion". This was back in 1985 before my creativty was destroyed by life and career and reality television.
--- Ban humanity.
I saw MacGyver beat a fingerprint scanner once, a long, long time ago. I wonder if he has a Master's degree?
I attempted to demonstrate this problem for a client who was interested in a finger print scanner for a specific purpose. I used silly putty with limited success.
Prime numbers are exactly what Alan Greenspan says they are -S. Minsky
The main problem with liveness detection methods based on extra hardware, is that the scanners have to be adjusted to operate efficiently in different kinds of environments...
"So why does it have a rectal probe?"
"That's just part of the design."
Do not fold, spindle or mutilate.
Incorporating pulse oximeters (those little things with the red light they put on you fingers while in the hospital) could make it harder to use Jell-o fingers. They verify it is a real finger by sensing blood oxygen and pulse and then the scanner would verify the identity. They are also cheap and realiable Just a thought.
Things are not as they appear, nor are they otherwise
n/t
Uh, that's because calcium hydroxide -burned- it off, not "wore it down". It's actually quite common, because there is a delay between exposure and reaction. Well, that and people think "hey, it's just rocks and dirt and stuff, i don't have to wear gloves..."
Please help metamoderate.
Has anyone read the actual report?
In order to get the latent prints (from which the 'fake' prints are created), the experimenters had their subjects wipe their finger on their nose (to make the latent prints easier to capture), had them press their finger on a glass platen, and even checked if their fingers had scars (if so, they chose another, better finger).
With this kind of cooperation and preparation, no wonder they beat the systems. As anyone knows, once you have someone on the inside you can break any security system.
In the real world, latent prints are blurred, not defined; smudged, not clean; and might not even be the finger the user has enrolled in the fingerprint device itself. Fingers don't come with labels like 'index' or 'thumb'.
Again, if the experimenters retrieved their samples from a dirty beer glass in a smoky bar I'd be more concerned, but...they didn't. The world of the lab is a lot different from the real world.
Let's take these reports in context, fellow Slashdotters.
In any case, I say we argue for fingerprint devices that protect fingerprint templates by matching and storing them on-board a device that you carry with you as another reply mentioned, where the fingerprint templates are encrypted or protected.
Spoofing fingerprints was one of my early childhood memories, watching Mission Impossible. And unless you are visually watching the spoofer, making sure he/she is not wearing any layer of artificial skin on the fingers, there is no guarantee that a fingerprint actually belongs to the person whose fingerprints are being scanned.
__________
The more I know people, the more I love animals
..is chicken shit. I'm not accepted due to health issues. Marines told me that 3 years ago. So fuck you, "AC".
That's right. All your base.
Circa 1985 there was a big push by a handwriting biometrics company in the UK. They claimed to be able to reduce a signature to a few hundred bytes that could be stored on a (then state-of-the-art) smart card.
Their "big insight" was to measure not only the relative shapes etc. of the signature, but also the speed with which each part of it was written. This was claimed to deliver really super terrific results.
We set up their system and ran some testing. Results were random. If you made it sensitive enough to seem secure, you had to sign about 50 times before you "got it right."
Obviously this technology didn't go anywhere, because nobody is flogging biometric signature scanning anymore (at least as far as I know).
The article, plus my experience, makes me wonder how much testing these guys do before they set the Marketing Drone Exaggeration Bit "on". Hell, what am I saying, I already know the answer. Not much.
I didn't really understand anything you said, but I see you managed to mention testicles in a /. post, and that was cool...
[cue Butthead laugh]
.sigs are for post^Hers.
Why, live DNA sample, of course. Acquired, analyzed, and compared while you wait.
.sigs are for post^Hers.
This would't have happened if they used fingerprints. :)
Fingerprint scanners are exactly that.
Finger. Print. Scanners.
They're not "Absolute Identity Verifiers", or "Identity Truth Machines".
They are simply tools to be used with other forms and methods of identification. Are *all* fingerprinting validation systems supposed to include "temperature, pulse, blood pressure, electric resistance, etc"? Only if some company were relying on fingerprints ALONE to verify someone's identity. But NO company would rely on fingerprints alone. Also, it would make the machine MUCH too costly for anybody to buy.
The bottom line is, yeah sure, fingerprint scanners can't tell the difference between a human finger and a gelatin one. But if a fingerprint is *all* that it takes to get access to something, then the institution has problems that dig far deeper than the inadequacies of any fingerprint scanner.
Who really RTFA in its entirety?
...if you can't say it in 30 pages, why bother... :P
Hell I really doubt education reviewers of theses actually read them all. Given the number of masters and PhD theses generated each year at some institutions, there's no way they are all read and reviewed with any significant focus.
Join the Movement! Shorter Theses For All!
.sigs are for post^Hers.
"Ziggy doesn't know!"
"Oh boy..."
That's right. All your base.
80% of all statistics are made up.
.sigs are for post^Hers.
...you just presented a *mirror image* of a finger print to the scanner.
Don't know if this will make a difference of not - but I suspect it might.
It would suck to have your finger lopped off - but even worse so to have it lopped off by an idiot.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Certainly possible... but someone good at stage makeup could also alter someone's face as a disguise and trick most people searching for a specific, wanted, individual, as that individual walked right past security and onto a plane.
I think the point of these security measures is just to increase the level of difficulty, not to eliminate all risk....
IMHO, a fingerprint scanner works well enough as a basically useful screening device. Sure, it can be fooled, like most people or devices... but it's like your door locks at home. Won't stop a professional with lockpicks, but serves the general purpose.
www.corren.se
Imagine if the keyring that you currently keep in your pocket, kept leaving copies of itself on every object you touch. Imagine anyone who found a copy (with a little work) could drive your car away or freely spend your money or walk right in the front door of your locked house. Now imagine that the worst has happened, that someone has stolen a copy of your keys. Currently, it's rather inconvenient, you must create new keys (and sometimes, locks). Now tell me, how do you change your keys when the key is your right thumb? You can't. Once your key is stolen, you're totally screwed, forever.
A friend of mine in the office has some sort of skin condition which causes his hands to produce very acidic sweat. It's acidic enough to buff the leather on his steering wheel and gear shifter. His fingers will erase the letters off the keys on some keyboards (I assume some keyboards use better quality ink that is more resistant). Coffee mugs with cheap paint on them suffer the same fate on the handles.
This person can open any fingerprint-protected laptop in the office (we bought a bunch of these from some company who was beta-testing them, they are now out of production) and make it boot. He just smears his fingertip onto the sensor and wiggles it a little bit, and the machine accepts it as an authorized print.
These fingerprint detectors are of the capacitance-coupling variety. I don't know if the same trick works with the other fingerprint sensor technologies.
It is a commonly held belief that inflation is a general rising in prices, and deflation is the opposite. This is just plain wrong: inflation is an increase in the overall money supply and deflation is the opposite. Rising and falling prices are the end-effects of inflation and deflation. It is generally agreed that inflation and deflation are destructive to the long-term economy, but that is the wrong way to look at it. If you know that money supply is increasing or decreasing and you are first in line at the trough you will profit superamazingly. If you are at the back end, you simply get to eat the vomit of those who gorged and hurled before you.
These 'security initiatives' and whatnot are created to absorb front-end inflation and vice versa. "Trickle-down" is a fool's game. Central Banks ostensibly exist to prevent inlation, but it is quite obvious from the evidence that the exact opposite is true. More proof that those on the inside are the ones that benefit from inflation: the masses are told the opposite. When prices rise, inflation is attacked, but it's already too late. Same with deflation and press reports of impending deflation: this is the best evidence that the money supply is about to increase and that there will be a host of new government initiatives to fight it (absorb the new money before prices rise becuase of its introduction). "Let them eat cake," she said. And money is not created by printing it -- not in any meaningful amount, not any more -- it is created through credit (debt).
Thus, these silly 'initiatives' will not go away until all the money created (inflation) has been absorbed by those that understand this and profit from it. Until such time as the economy demands new ones...
this thesis is only a better documented, nicely written replay of a japanese experiment from some years ago :
the matsumoto experiment
and it surely doesnt mean the biometrics are not secure!
a complete biometrics based security solution has 3 "components" :
Something you know: e.g. a password or a PIN.
Something you hold: e.g. a credit card, a key, or a passport.
Something you are (biometrics): e.g. a fingerprint, iris pattern, etc.
their demonstration only fooled the 3-rd component of such a system ... which means they got NOTHING! ... plus, the most secure fingerprint scanners read the biometric info from under the epidermis(the outer "dead" skin) and are not so easily fooled with an artificial finger or fingertip ... the fact that they tested cheap of-the-shelf hardware is not exactly concludent.
.. while unfailible security does not exist, biometrics can make a big difference when used right!
The whole study is just an argument against bad hardware and sloppy security systems, not against the usage of the biometrics
"There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
9-11 will never happen again. the world is ready for them now.
....or Donald Rumsfeld?
Wonder if her techniques would fool the fingerprint scanner on the high-end iPaq PPCs?? It's not the type you press your finger on, you have to roll your finger over a narrow scanner...so the "gelatin" technique doesn't seem like it would be as effective on the rolling sytems because you'd be stretching/skewing the gelettin imprint....just a thought.
The folks who make the hand scaners that read the patterns of your blood vessels under you skin are probably pretty happy about this. I havent ever read about someone fooling those hand scanners.
Non-System foot or foot error. remove from mouth and strike any key when ready
So she took a copy of a fingerprint and a device which reads fingerprints said it looks the same as the original?
What's next? A slashdot story about how linux is insecure because as long as you know the root password linux will still authenticate you?
Oh no!! LINUX SECURITY FOOLED!!
9-11 = -2
Of course 9/11 happens once every year, usually in September in the USA but in most of the world it can happen in November.
This, in my opinion, is why "9/11" is a terrible name for what happened. (Oh, yeah, and since I am ranting here - it is NOT, I repeat - NOT Nine-One-One. It is Nine-Eleven. They *are* different).
Of course if you are referring to the terrorist attacks on Septemeber 11, 2001 - then I agree. The same style of terrorist attacks will never happen again. They can't. Not because of the TSA (Thousands Standing Around) or even any "biometric" scanners at airports (see, I am kinda on-topic?). But because they exposed their hand, we know their "poker face" for that one. Nope - the next one (and there WILL be a next one) will be entirely different - and just as unexpected.
The only way to win the war on Terrorism is to get people to stop hating us, to get people not WANTING to terrorize us.
Otherwise - either people die, or we become a police state. Neither one is appealing to me.
The only reason that 9/11 went as badly as it did was that the other passengers assumed that if they just obeyed the terrorists for a few hours, they could put it all behind them and get on with their lives. When the passengers in the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania realized this was not the case, they stopped the terrorists.
... I think the plane was shot down."
There are allegations -- maybe be paranoid fantasy, I don't know -- but allegations, anyway, that the US Air Force shot down that Pennsylvania plane. Example:
"I heard like a boom and the engine sounded funny," [an eyewitness] told the [Philadelphia] Daily News. "I heard two more booms - and then I did not hear anything
- Source
-kgj
-kgj
Now, a clever man would not use a plane, because he would know that only a great fool would repeat the same method. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose to attack with a plane. But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly have to attack with a plane.
Made me laugh!
BEST PARODY EVER on SlashDot!
-kgj
-kgj
...welcome our new Waffle House overlords!
...welcome our new non-security overlords!
...welcome our new fingerprinted overlords!
...welcome our new useless security-weilding overlords!
...welcome our new civil liberty-forsaking overlords!
...welcome our new knee-jerk overlords!
ACHTUNG! Das computermachine ist nicht fuer gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist nicht fuer gewerken bei das dumpkopfen.
There's a big difference. If someone compromises your lock, you can change it.
If someone compromises your finger, you can't chop it off and grow a new one. Your method of authentication is screwed for the rest of your life.
--
*Art
When I read the title, I thought it was a dupe on the OS fingerprinting article, where someone got nmap to think that a linux box was a dreamcast :/
I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
the thing that strikes me about this is that most replica finger prints are made with a gel based alternative. if we all remember from camp, shining a flashlight through our fingers illuminated other features, such as capillary distribution in the tips, or subsurface scar tissue. all of which are likely to decrease the ability to spoof, but require more resources than 2d print scanning techniques.
but someone good at stage makeup could also alter someone's face as a disguise and trick most people searching for a specific, wanted, individual
You're right. And it would be even better if they could imitate their voice. They could fool anyone.
Especially if there were a hot babe around to distract them.
Then, if we had a real electronics hacker to help make useful gadgets like bugs and homing beacons to plant on them, or a device to remotely divert phone calls, we could wreak all sorts of havoc.
Oh, better throw in some muscle, just in case. And you might have to carry the electronics guy hidden in a box a lot.
What a plan, huh? And with a mastermind like me to lead them, success is assured.
Just wait 'til I narrate my biography.
when the National Guard were deployed to the
USA's airports, they were never issued ammo.
The worst they could have done is install their
bayonet (for crowd control purposes(?)).
It was strictly a Bush PR move. And 2-1/2 yrs
later, the situation regarding the "war on
terrorism" hasn't evolved much. The USA still
has unguarded borders and seaports. Both
illegal immigration and the rate of identity
theft are both higher now than before 9/11/01.
It sure isn't any comfort that fingerprint
scanners are so ineffective, just as have
iris scanners also proven to be. What's
next? Maybe implanted RFID chips?
Any reasonable authentication system will require more than one factor, only if you have someone's ID card and passphrase would this work in a 2 or 3 factor scenario. Maybe a concern for Lexus but not for most access control systems. In the world of biometrics its a trade off, throughput, accuracy and price for customer acceptance. Fingerprint is easy to use and inexpensive.