Slashdot Mirror


Hacker Club Publishes German Official's Fingerprint

A number of readers let us know about the Chaos Computer Club's latest caper: they published the fingerprint of German Secretary of the Interior Wolfgang Schäuble (link is to a Google translation of the German original). The club has been active in opposition to Germany's increasing push to use biometrics in, for example, e-passports. Someone friendly to the club's aims captured Schäuble's fingerprint from a glass he drank from at a panel discussion. The club published 4,000 copies of their magazine Die Datenschleuder including a plastic foil reproducing the minister's fingerprint — ready to glue to someone else's finger to provide a false biometric reading. The CCC has a page on their site detailing how to make such a fake fingerprint. The article says a ministry spokesman alluded to possible legal action against the club.

18 of 253 comments (clear)

  1. Respect, respect maan! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'd like to see this done to officials in all countries.

    Reminds me of Gone in 60 seconds (the Jolie version) where one of the car-thieves glues on Elvis' fingerprints.

    1. Re:Respect, respect maan! by dpx420 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah if someone tried this with a high ranking government official in China or somewhere, they would indeed mysteriously 'disappear' in 60 seconds.

    2. Re:Respect, respect maan! by Idiomatick · · Score: 4, Insightful

      WTF does china have to do with this?

    3. Re:Respect, respect maan! by garglblaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, you summarized it up very well: Germany, Land of the Free, Home aof the Brave. Times are a-changing aren't they? Hint: No, Bush's country isn't any longer considered 'Home of the Free' in any part of the world any longer.. - Sad to say this but true.. my 2 cts

      --

      perl -e 'printf("%x!\n",49153)'

  2. Good for them by Scareduck · · Score: 5, Insightful

    High officials often seem to think the consequences of privacy-invading legislation will only occur to other (read: little) people. It's good to remind people in those positions that they do not have absolute power, and that they need to think about second order consequences.

    --

    Dog is my co-pilot.

    1. Re:Good for them by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      All three easily solved via a security by-pass incentive in a form of a pistol to the head or a kidnapped lover/child/dog etc which will "get it" if you do not cooperate or some poison with time release and the antidote delivered upon your succesful authentication, etc and so on and on and on and on.

      "Ironclad security" does not exist.

  3. Biometrics: lamest of all security protocols by DamnStupidElf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    At least until extreme body modification is commonplace, biometrics suck for identification. It's the only modern "security" mechanism that lacks revocation. Without revocation, a security model is eternally broken as soon as one chink is found.

    A person only has 20 digits, 2 palms, 2 soles, 2 retinas, and one genome. All of the biometric properties of those can easily be duplicated with noninvasive methods (simply enrolling in a biometric system requires the same access as duplication would). When one of those 27 properties is compromised, how do you revoke its use? I guess start with the fingers and palms and as people get older they have to start using their feet for identification, and at the very last make them get pricked for each identification. When all the biometric identifiers are used up, the now useless (at least in a Secure(TM) society) people can be recycled in the soylent green program or something.

  4. Major flaw of biometrics by this+great+guy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This event highlights one of the major flaw of biometrics. This official had his fingerprint copied. There is nothing he can do. He can't change it. He can't prevent people from using it. No fingerprint reader will ever be able to determine with 100% certainty whether a particular fingerprint is real or fake. Bottom line: when one of your biometric traits gets stolen, you get screwed. For life.

    I hope this convinces governments that using biometrics for anything is a bad idea (other than perhaps criminal investigations, although what if this german official's fingerprint was found on a murder scene ?).

    1. Re:Major flaw of biometrics by BlackCreek · · Score: 4, Insightful
      AFAICT the point that the parent poster was making is that unlike other security measures (say ID card, social security number etc) you just can't get a new biometric reading for your fingers (without at least some serious medical intervention), you can't get a new iris scan for your eyes, you can't get a new DNA code etc.

      Biometric data may put some entry barriers higher, so what? The problem is that you just can't get a new iris scan, like you get a new passport once your gets stolen.

      The worst of the situation is that we have all these politicians deciding --without the least form public debate about the real privacy implications-- that biometric data is now to be collected, and used, and kept by the government.

    2. Re:Major flaw of biometrics by BlackCreek · · Score: 5, Insightful
      The whole point of the parent poster is apparently lost to you.

      The point being that my biometric data is mine. It is private. It is not the government's business to have my blood samples, or DNA, or finger print. I am not a criminal, and therefore I expect to be entitled to some privacy from the BigBrother.

      Once some retarded government bureaucrat decides to leave a laptop inside a taxi or something, my private data is lost, and I can never get a new fingerprint, or iris scan. I can get a new social security number, I can get a new passport, a new bank account number, but I **cannot** get a new DNA.

  5. Re:In future news... by metlin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One can only hope.

    What better way than a senior official to be convicted of crimes as a result of identity theft because officials such as him decided that privacy didn't really matter anymore?

    Personally, I sincerely wish that this happens in all the countries which have fingerprinting in place. Enough already.

  6. Legal action? by HalAtWork · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article says a ministry spokesman alluded to possible legal action against the club.
     
    To what ends? You can't deter it as it's already happened, and you can't suppress it, as even the method for tricking the security system is widely known. If the security system is broken, you can't legalize it into working again. The security system was built in order to keep things safe, and now we have to keep other things safe from the security system itself.

  7. A perfect demonstration to the perfect person by smolloy · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This is a perfect way to demonstrate to the perfect person why such invasions of privacy are bad, and of the unintended negative consequences of their plans. Sometimes people in power forget that the "solutions" they develop to certain problems may be worse than the problems themselves. All they see is that a certain issue will be fixed -- not that the fix raises even worse issues.

    Bravo!

  8. Re:Brave defenders of freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    At least they get off their asses unlike American's who cry about the Constitution but do fuck all about it.

    Bush was right, it is JUST a piece of PAPER. Why? Because American's do NOTHING about it and do not believe in it.

    This is plain to see by their inactions.

  9. Re:In future news... by Naughty+Bob · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We hear that Wolfgang Schäuble is convicted of committing 17 crimes. Simultaneously
    17 One-fingered crimes at that...
    --
    "Be light, stinging, insolent and melancholy"
  10. Re:couldn't possibly have negative consequences by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since a senior public official still remains a public official, it could probably be defended on the same grounds that allow for political satire. It is expressly allowed in most countries to make fun of political figures, especially if you're doing it from a political standpoint yourself.

    Then again, we also have a new buzzword for crime with ideological motives. It's called terrorism...

  11. Re:couldn't possibly have negative consequences by Belial6 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It likely is. In just the same way that sinking the Titanic before any passengers boarded would have been grounds for criminal action.

  12. Re:In future news... by Znork · · Score: 4, Insightful

    DNA now that is good, and it is something difficult to duplicate.

    No need to duplicate it, free samples are falling off you everywhere you go. So no, DNA isn't very good either.

    There is however a very good biometric one can use. A neural imprint of a specific token; it currently can't be read without the cooperation of the person, it leaves no imprint around except as the owner desires and controls.

    It's known as a 'password'. A technology that is, perhaps, new and radical, but far more secure than other biometrics. Which, unfortunately, isn't particularly secure, just less insecure than the crap the scam artists of the biometrics industry are trying to push on the gullible.