Slashdot Mirror


Fingerprint Scanner That Works From 6 Feet

Bruce Schneier found a somewhat older story that I haven't seen before about a device that is smaller than a tissue box, but uses two 1.3 megapixel cameras and a polarized light source to scan a fingerprint from two meters away.

24 of 83 comments (clear)

  1. Hook up a second camera by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2

    What a great way to surreptitiously collect fingerprints en masse: take this device, attach a camera, and use a website like Facebook to connect an image of a person's face to the recorded fingerprint.

    Any lawyers want to comment on the legality of such an operation in the United States?

    --
    Palm trees and 8
    1. Re:Hook up a second camera by louic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I am not a lawyer, but the USA have proven often enough that they think they can do whatever they want for "national security", no matter whether it is legal or not.

  2. this sounds very useful for you by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 4, Funny

    At a distance it'll be even harder to tell that you're wearing a fake fingerprint skin.

    1. Re:this sounds very useful for you by i+kan+reed · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But they would have a picture of who it was who showed the fake fingerprint if they have security issues.

  3. Conclusion by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

    Fringerprints are worthless as biometric identity data because they are easy to acquire and copy but impossible to replace once compromised.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:Conclusion by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

      Can you name biometrics that can be replaced?

      "Welcome back, Mr. Yakamoto! How are those assorted tank tops working out?"

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    2. Re:Conclusion by profplump · · Score: 2

      Yes. But people keep envisioning (and sometimes implementing) authentication systems that use biometrics only, which is just as bad a plan as giving 500 people the same key to a building. So long as biometrics are paired with a second authentication factor that can be changed they still represent a net improvement in security, even if a copy of your biometric data becomes available and can be successfully substituted at the point of authentication.

  4. Isn't this bad for fingerprint scanners? by zill · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Fingerprint Sniffer That Works From 6 Feet

    Doesn't this technology invalidate all existing fingerprint scanners? An attacker can easily mine the fingerprints of every employee of a company by leaving a few innocent looking rocks in their parking lot.

    1. Re:Isn't this bad for fingerprint scanners? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not a problem for me. I wear tinfoil gloves.

    2. Re:Isn't this bad for fingerprint scanners? by MischaNix · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People don't give a damn about the validity of their existing security technologies. They just like the feeling of security.

    3. Re:Isn't this bad for fingerprint scanners? by gl4ss · · Score: 2

      it doesn't invalidate the scanners, it just invalidates the idea that fingerprints would be secret. they're not, they never were.

      it just invalidates the idea that they're secret. anyways, a scanner that works really close, with a big sensor, could provide you better results and do day-to-day adjustments.

      also one thing some people forget, all regular keys can be copied with a cellphone camera and somebody with determination(or with the help of someone with determination). think about that.

      (so whats the result? just live your life and don't give a crap)

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  5. Can I...excuse me? by magusxxx · · Score: 2

    I don't see the point. Women at the bars say they know exactly who I am from across the room. *shrug*

    --
    Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
  6. Thumbs up! by ThunderBird89 · · Score: 2

    Cool, so now I can log into my laptop by giving it thumbs up if I buy the device?
    Double thumbs up for su?

    --
    Hyperbole: I use it liberally!
    1. Re:Thumbs up! by dasdrewid · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Who's got 2 thumbs and really needs to alter some boot variables? THIS GUY!!!"

      --
      No trespassing. Violators will be shot. Survivors will be shot again.
  7. Re:Why? by milkmage · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why? because you didn't read:

    "Currently, individuals entering a military installation must place their fingers on a scanner, with a Marine standing beside them to help ensure a viable print. Powell would prefer there to be a safe distance between the Marine and the person being scanned."

    aside from personal safety, if you don't touch the pad, you don't smudge it.. thus the part about "viable print"

  8. Re:Why? by gstoddart · · Score: 2

    Neat but I don't see the point. Why grab someone's fingerprints from a couple of meters when you can just have them swipe it on a pad? Could anyone point out the (legitimate, non-thiefy) benefits of such a device?

    What, as opposed to the TSA setting up a backscatter imager in a public place, and by the time people reached the sign indicating they were in an area that "might" be scanned, they already had been? Or a courthouse keeping thousands of images of people in the scanners?

    This is all about people who are quite willing to implement the surveillance society for us. Everything you do will be monitored, without you knowing it.

    The people who are buying and building these technologies are giddy at the prospect of gathering all of their information with neither your consent nor your knowledge.

    And you're asking for what the 'legitimate' uses of this are? The short answer from them is "if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear". You're expected to be compliant, and just suck it up and accept it as normal.

    To them, in order to protect us from terrorists, they need the ability to take this information from you without needing to ask you.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  9. Re:Why? by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 2

    That's it! From now on I'm giving the finger to anyone who waves at me.

  10. Discount? by Gravitron+5000 · · Score: 4, Funny
    From TFA.

    Burcham says several potential customers have indicated that a single-finger scanner would be sufficient for their needs—so AOS plans to sell both a single-finger device and a more expensive five-finger device.

    But shouldn't there be a 5 finger discount?

  11. Re:Why? by CrispyZorro · · Score: 3, Funny

    This is all about people who are quite willing to implement the surveillance society for us. Everything you do will be monitored, without you knowing it.

    I finally found a use for my tin-foil gloves.

  12. Re:Why? by ciderbrew · · Score: 5, Funny

    Thanks, we put the camera behind you.

  13. Not to be technical on a tech site..but by nomel · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Could someone explain how this works? Is this some sort of speckle interferometer? I don't understand how you can get the ridge profile by separating the light polarities unless you're shining the laser at very steep angles..

    1. Re:Not to be technical on a tech site..but by nomel · · Score: 2

      Maybe it's something like this Touchless 3-D Fingerprinting with two polarized beams going at once to speed things up.

  14. Really? by NicknamesAreStupid · · Score: 2

    I have been using fingerprint scanners for years, even on laptops. Recently they added them at my gym. They work for me about 15% of the time, and my finger is pressing against it. I have also read about retinal scanners that work at 5 meters. Perhaps like many products, these work well in the lab but not in the wild.

  15. Good News by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 3, Interesting

    for glove sales.