Slashdot Mirror
Smart Phones Could Know Their Users By How They Walk
mirgens writes "Technology Review has a short article on new work on gait analysis with the accelerometers built into many smart phones. The work was done at the Norwegian Information Security Laboratory ('Nislab'). The need for more security on mobile devices is increasing with new functionalities and features made available. To improve device security, Nislab proposed gait recognition as a protection mechanism — in other words, if somebody else walks away with your phone, it locks up. While previous work on gait recognition used video sources, for instance to identify people in airports or secure buildings, the Nislab researchers collected the gait data using a Google G1 phone containing the AK8976A embedded accelerometer." What if you're running from a mugger and want to dial 911?
What if you're running from a mugger and want to dial 911?
Then don't lock out emergency functions - similar to the way that (in the US at least) phones without a valid subscription can still call 911.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
I'm worried that this sort of thing would lead to phones that won't allow me to answer when they detect that I might be driving.
Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
Phone locks up when you're stumbling drunk - for some people that's a good thing!
How's it going to work for ladies who carry phones in handbags etc (many don't use the same bag all the time).
;).
Those ladies actually have a high chance of getting their phones stolen - the thieves steal the bag with the phone inside etc. Many ladies typically don't wear any garments that have pockets. Or worse there are pockets but they are sewn shut so that you don't use them by mistake and make an ugly looking bulge
As for guys, it might work, but I doubt a significant number of us would intentionally buy a phone with this. If us guys wanted an antitheft phone we'd just buy a really cheap phone. Or "customize" it to the point where its fence value drops immensely.
A way to reduce phone theft is by phone makers making their phone IMEIs very hard to change (and ensuring that they are unique), and the cellular providers blocking stolen phones (even globally).
The New iPhone: John Cleese Edition!
Great!!! I've always wanted a phone that won't work if I am jogging, riding a horse, skiing, walking on ice, sprain my ankle, having a gout attack, riding a bicycle, fleeing for my life, .... When can I expect to be able to buy this wonder?
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
If you're trying to dial the cops while running from a mugger I predict an encounter with a sturdy lamppost, street sign or news stand in your very near future.
From TFA: "they were only able to achieve a 20 percent Equal Error Rate (EER), which means that one time out of five, the phone registered either a false positive or a false negative when trying to determine the identity of the user. And that's with the phone in a hip holster, oriented in the same way every time."
Also, I recently injured my leg - would I be unable to use my phone with my new limp?
>> What if you're running from a mugger and want to dial 911?
> Then don't lock out emergency functions - similar to the way that
> (in the US at least) phones without a valid subscription can still call 911.
The editing on /. gets worse each day. What is more interesting of a question would have been "are walks as unique as fingerprints, and can this be used to violate privacy" How is this quantified, and could the police put you on a suspect list because your "walk" is similar to who they think committed some crime? Those are interesting questions. As for 911, as the parent points out, that would be obvious to anyone with any life experience.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
You had me until, "Somehow I can talk on a cell phone without disregarding all awareness of my environment, it comes from not being a bovine idiot with a deer-in-headlights outlook on life."
Every single one of them thinks the same thing. Newsflash: you're one of them.
Don't completely disable the phone. If the gait analysis comes up "wrong" then require the user to enter his password again.
If you are a passenger, you are just outta luck.
In that case, such legislation would never get out of committee because it would impose an undue burden on people who carpool or ride public transport. All seats in a car or especially a bus (except one) are reasonably safe for making phone calls.
There's no way this feature is going to be 100% accurate, and certainly not in 1.0. Every "recognition" technology ever has an error rate, and this will be no different. If it's intended as a security feature, the developers will have to calibrate it to err on the side of denying access, otherwise they'll open themselves up to criticism (and probably legal suits) over its failure to provide the advertised security. This means that there will be false positives, in which the phone denies its legitimate owner access (wearing new shoes, walking on unusual surface, injured, tired, listening to "Beat It"), and that will get the phone chucked across the room in pretty short order.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
My point was, why should your phone do something that your car should do (or already does do)?
You do know that OnStar is only available as OEM equipment on GM (Government Motors) vehicles, right? Oh and Saab, like anyone buys those.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!