Slashdot Mirror


Windows 10's Biometric Security Layer Introduced

jones_supa writes: One of the major concepts of Windows 10 are new security ideas, and though Microsoft has touched on this topic before, it's only now giving us a more comprehensive look in the form of "Windows Hello." This is an authentication system that uses a variety of biometric signatures and combines hardware and software to allow for seamless and secure user recognition and sign-in. According to Microsoft, the ideal scenario here would be for you to simply look at or touch a new device running Windows 10 and to be immediately signed in. The software analyzes input from such hardware as fingerprint scanners and infrared sensors to make sure that you are you and not some impostor, and then signs you in without requiring you to enter a password. But the point of Windows Hello isn't only convenience, as the company's blog post notes, but also security. We've heard time and time again how insecure passwords are, and Microsoft is aiming to offer a widely-deployed replacement while still delivering enterprise grade security and privacy.

138 comments

  1. No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Considering I have heard tales of biometric scanners being bypassed by pressing a warm hot dog against them, I think I'll pass.

    I'm sure they've improved, but I don't know that they've improved enough. Plus, I'm not sure I'd want to be auto-logged in by just picking up the device.

    1. Re:No thanks... by gronofer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd say you should also wear gloves everywhere in case your fingerprint is compromised. It's not like you can change it easily.

    2. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I have heard tales of biometric scanners being bypassed by pressing a warm hot dog against them

      Yeah, but you've gotta get 'em drunk first, otherwise you end up in the back of a police cruiser with a black eye and swollen testicles.

    3. Re:No thanks... by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The deal with Windows 8 is, you get a 'Microsoft Account' that you use to log onto all your Windows 8 devices and computers. Microsoft has the password. You can't have a password on your machine that is local that Microsoft doesn't have. You can't change your password to anything you've used recently. All the usual 'LAN' password requirements, mandated, and your Windows machine won't work without them.

      So with Biometrics tied into this, you'll have your Microsoft Account, you'll have to use it to authenticate on Windows products, and you won't be able to become de-linked from it, ever. You'll not be able to be anonymous on any Windows computer or device ever again.

      Facebook and their 'Real Name' policy should be so lucky.

    4. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Microsoft account is optional. I don't use it. Please update your FUD accordingly.

    5. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      pressing a warm hot dog against them

      I'm personally going to use my Windows 10 machine without trousers, with the camera firmly in the prime position to identify my unique "warm hot dog." Take that, all you webcam hackers you! .. wait..

    6. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So your comment is "I'm ignorant and afraid, so I'm not going to use it"?

      I know, I know, that's really snarky, but working in the biometrics industry that kind of attitude just rubs me the wrong way.

    7. Re:No thanks... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

      Considering I have heard tales of biometric scanners being bypassed by pressing a warm hot dog against them, I think I'll pass.

      That wasn't a hot dog.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    8. Re:No thanks... by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      you've seen those movies where they gouge out an eye for a retinal scan....

    9. Re:No thanks... by gl4ss · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The Microsoft account is optional. I don't use it. Please update your FUD accordingly.

      it is indeed optional. however, with windows 8.1 they made it less obvious that it is optional. basically, yo have to go to something that looks like a failure state before you can create a local account. fucking ridiculous.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    10. Re:No thanks... by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      That wasn't my experience a few months ago when I bought a new laptop with windows 8.1

    11. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's why you use a toeprint instead. Sure, your computer will start smelling of feet, but them's the tradeoff.

    12. Re:No thanks... by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      you do know that it is optional right? I saw it on windows 8 when i first got a copy and went out and found out how to not use it http://www.howtogeek.com/12197...

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    13. Re:No thanks... by ganjadude · · Score: 4, Interesting

      not only this, but after the courts saying they can force you to submit biometric data to cops but not passwords, why would i want to "secure" my device with something that they can get into easily either with me held captive, or in some cases just a photo of ones face???

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    14. Re:No thanks... by vux984 · · Score: 5, Informative

      yo have to go to something that looks like a failure state before you can create a local account. fucking ridiculous.

      Not quite. It prompts you to sign in with your existing Microsoft account. At the bottom of that screen, it says "Don't have one? And a link to "create a new account".

      Contextually that, for a lot of people is interpreted to mean "Create a new Microsoft account" however, if you click it you are presented with an account creation page for a Microsoft account but at the bottom it offers another link "Sign in without a Microsoft account" and you can create a local account from there.

      The fail state you refer to is the -other- way of reaching the same page -- where you enter dummy microsoft credentials in; force it to fail to login; and that lands you on a page where you can create a local account as well.

      However, the "proper" way to reach the local account option is the first:

      Create new Account
      Sign in without a Microsoft account

      So its not as bad you suggest, I agree it's just obscure enough to be misleading.

      For what its worth a lot of OEMs are shipping with a local user account pre-configured or are otherwise customizing it to create a local account by default.

    15. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can use a local (non-Microsoft Account) to log into Windows 8.x. But if you want to use the Store app, you do need to specify which Microsoft Account to use for that app specifically. This makes sense since the credit card info is maintained there.

    16. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Microsoft Account is optional, and even more optional in Windows 10. In Windows 10, each app, including Skydrive, can be signed into individually, regardless of whether you're logged in with a local or Microsoft account.

    17. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forced Identification, South African Torture Style (FISATS). Look, I've got a government acronym, ready to go!

    18. Re:No thanks... by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      This is extra security. You must swipe your dachshund against the phone to unlock it. The dachshund has teeth therefore is unlikely to be stolen along with the phone.

    19. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what she said

    20. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think only blind people miss that part and falsely believe you have to create a Microsoft account. No matter how "obscure" some idiot like GP claims it to be, it's still far better than what Google does, forcing users to create a Google account with no option for a local account on Android or Chrome OS.

    21. Re:No thanks... by Ryanrule · · Score: 1

      apple. google.

    22. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why biometric security systems are considered medium grade security at best.

    23. Re:No thanks... by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 4, Funny

      So the last sentence in the summary should have read "We've heard time and time again how insecure passwords are, and Microsoft is aiming to replace them with a password-equivalent where you can never change your password when it's compromised, you leave copies of it on everything you touch (or look at), and which can be defeated with a bit of gelatin or a printout of a photo".

      Yay, Microsoft!

    24. Re:No thanks... by WaffleMonster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think only blind people miss that part and falsely believe you have to create a Microsoft account.
      No matter how "obscure" some idiot like GP claims it to be

      It is clearly intentionally deceptive. There is no excuse for this behavior from a corporation who expects people to trust them.

      it's still far better than what Google does, forcing users to create a Google account with no option for a local account on Android or Chrome OS.

      Better than what Microsoft does when you refuse to set an account on a Windows Phone device. At least I can still use an Android device and install software on it without having a Google account.

    25. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Microsoft account is optional. I don't use it. Please update your FUD accordingly.

      This is Slashdot. If the topic relates to Microsoft we either revert to FUD (ingenious or ignorance) or our stories and facts are several decades old.

    26. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://media.ccc.de/browse/congress/2014/31c3_-_6450_-_de_-_saal_1_-_201412272030_-_ich_sehe_also_bin_ich_du_-_starbug.html#video. Starbug would like to have a word with you.
      After seeing this, for me, biometry is done.
      Watch it if you understand enough German, it would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

    27. Re:No thanks... by Richard_at_work · · Score: 0

      It is clearly intentionally deceptive. There is no excuse for this behavior from a corporation who expects people to trust them.

      No, it really isn't.

      But then people like you will strive to find arguments against the things you dislike.

    28. Re:No thanks... by MitchDev · · Score: 1

      So criminals only need your body, not your co-operation to access your computer....

    29. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The deal with Windows 8 is, you get a 'Microsoft Account' that you use to log onto all your Windows 8 devices and computers. Microsoft has the password.

      No, they don't, they have an anonymous one-way hash of the password.

      You can't have a password on your machine that is local that Microsoft doesn't have.

      Yes you can. You can have a fully local account on Windows 8, not using the Microsoft Account at all.

      You can't change your password to anything you've used recently. All the usual 'LAN' password requirements, mandated, and your Windows machine won't work without them.

      Yes it will, there is no password policy requirements on local accounts. Your password can be anything you want it to be, including no password at all.

      So with Biometrics tied into this, you'll have your Microsoft Account, you'll have to use it to authenticate on Windows products, and you won't be able to become de-linked from it, ever.

      Yes you can, you can de-link your Microsoft Account whenever you like.

      You'll not be able to be anonymous on any Windows computer or device ever again.

      Yes you will. See above about all your assumptions being wrong.

    30. Re:No thanks... by Vlado · · Score: 3, Informative

      Maybe the experience there was customized. But if you want to create your local account on Windows 8.1 you are pretty much forced to go to the selection, which you would look at if you were about to create a Microsoft account and THEN there is a way to create it locally.
      Here is instruction list from MS site on how to create a local account from within the Windows itself (not easy).

      Swipe in from the right edge of the screen, tap Settings, and then tap Change PC settings. (If you're using a mouse, point to the lower-right corner of the screen, move the mouse pointer up, click Settings, and then click Change PC settings.)
      Tap or click Accounts, and then tap or click Other accounts.
      Tap or click Add an account, and then tap or click Sign in without a Microsoft account (not recommended).
      Tap or click Local account.
      Enter a user name for the new account.
      If you want this person to sign in with a password, enter and verify the password, add a password hint, and then tap or click Next.
      If your PC is on a domain, depending on the domain's security settings, you might be able to skip this step and tap or click Next, if you prefer.
      Tap or click Finish.

    31. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It is pretty easy to bypass, BUT it takes some knowledge as by default it does try to force you down the MS account route (which to be fair, most people will want to use). On test builds of Windows 10 it is even harder to bypass - the easiest way to bypass it on the build I am running now is to either not have a network driver for the device installed yet, disconnect the LAN cable (if using wired), or don't connect to wireless when prompted. Then it will "fail" into the local account setup and you can connect to the network later. But they are trying to make it harder to get to the local account setup stuff.

    32. Re:No thanks... by LordLimecat · · Score: 3, Informative

      He is in fact correct. They make it somewhat difficult to avoid being sucked into a Microsoft account, though there are ways to force it to desist. SkyDrive (or whatever its called now) also tries pretty hard to pull you in, though again you CAN force it to back off somewhat.

    33. Re:No thanks... by Jaseoldboss · · Score: 1

      There is an easy way which I discovered recently. Make sure you install without an internet connection, then creating a local account is the default instead of a hidden option.

    34. Re:No thanks... by moneybabylon · · Score: 0

      ok, it was warm.

    35. Re:No thanks... by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      last time I did it I remember having to go to "create account" option in order to get to another place through there on the small print option to create a local account - notice that the first page with the create account link only mentions MS account - so it's natural to presume that the link is for creating one(and it is) - on the next page there is a text link to create a local account, it's not even a "button" element to hide it . it's not intuitive, there was no notice on that page that I could create a local account on next page. keep in mind that many, many people already have ms accounts. I have several, but I did not want to log into my pc with one, so the option to make local account should have been right there and then.

      I've talked to several people working in IT who think windows 8.1 made the ms account mandatory.

      you can also later switch the account to local, though that as well I remember being somewhat cumbersome - and of course if you log into some ms stuff while not being careful your account gets converted.

      it's all very intentional to guide people into creating MS accounts so they can use the store. nothing strange about it as such(that's why the whole win8/8.1 exists anyways), but saying that it hasn't been designed to make you create or log in with your ms account is bollocks.

      NOTE: it's a little different on the first boot setup than if you create another account on the computer later.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      if it was easy and intuitive and straightforward youtube wouldn't be having these guide videos... notice how you need to press two times on an UI element that's not like clickable elements in previous windows versions(and in fact differs from the ui element they _want_ you to click).

      it's bollocks and designed solely to guide you to logging in with your hotmail due to thinking that doing something else is too complicated.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    36. Re:No thanks... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1
      The "optional" Microsoft account is probably the main reason why I'll be staying with my Windows 7 PCs as long as possible. I've been testing Windows 10, and there are far too many areas of the OS that require a login to Microsoft in order to become functional.

      .
      With Windows 10, it's like I'm getting a half-functional OS if I choose to have a local account and not to log in to Microsoft.

    37. Re:No thanks... by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      Why would it be obvious?

      MS has sunk itself numerous time by trying to please every little fuck up on earth. The result has been a crap load of legacy garbage to maintain over the course of many OSs. For the first time MS looks like it's putting it's pants on and telling you how it's going to be. In case you didn't notice, Apple and Google have already been forcing customers into "their way" so no harm done here.

    38. Re:No thanks... by neoritter · · Score: 1

      Because blue screen of death dude!!

    39. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you cannot access the store to get metro/winrt apps without a MS account. My two win8 machines are stuck with the apps MS and the OEM put on there, I will never sign up. Metro Skype is also useless, cannot use my Skype account but it works just fine in the win32 app...

    40. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is clearly intentionally deceptive. There is no excuse for this behavior from a corporation who expects people to trust them.

      It's clearly labelled, so what is deceptive about it? The very first time I installed Windows 8, I created a local account with ease. You'd have to be blind or just stupid not to see it.

      Better than what Microsoft does when you refuse to set an account on a Windows Phone device. At least I can still use an Android device and install software on it without having a Google account.

      Bullshit. You don't have to have a Microsoft account to use a Windows phone or to sideload apps on one.

    41. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or just click where it says "Sign in without a Microsoft account".

      For being nerds, people on Slashdot sure are stupid.

    42. Re:No thanks... by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      This was adding the first account after installing Windows, before it had an internet connection.

    43. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With the NSA assisted, 20cm accurate, constant 24/7 and global positioning of every Windows user, the system can't be anything else than tamper proof, or at least require quite intimate contact with the victim. There simply is no alternative for global security and safety!

    44. Re:No thanks... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      In practice, it's not very optional if you have to go to howtogeek, which I would imagine is not heavily used by average computer users.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    45. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another +5 Informative pants on fire post.

    46. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, my keyboard already reeks of jizz, so what's one more smell?

    47. Re:No thanks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it isn't. What she said was: "That's not even a Vienna sausage."

  2. How will they standardize readings across devices? by HalAtWork · · Score: 2

    Will you have to retrain the mechanism to recognize you every time you switch from Brand A biometric sensor to Brand B? If so, it might not recognize you across devices anyway. It seems attractive in theory but I wonder how practical it will be in practice, since a typical user will have access to a variety of Windows devices at home and work.

  3. Password? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    We've heard time and time again how insecure users are.

    FTFY. And I don't see how fancy biometric wizardry will fix the users.

  4. Passwords way more secure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try and get me to sign in otherwise ;-)

    Didn't rtfa but does it take into account user breach? As in I am tied to a chair?

    1. Re: Passwords way more secure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you're being tied to a chair and it isn't date night, I'd say the security of your laptop probably shouldn't be your top concern.

    2. Re: Passwords way more secure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I am needed as long as the data remains secure, then the laptop most certainly would be of the highest concern.

  5. Windows secure? by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1, Troll

    Windows secure
    Better than Zen
    Will it scandal-free insure
    Her Majesty, then?
    Burma Shave

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  6. Who you gonna call? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this personal information is stored somewhere.

    could you imagine the result of a database of thousands or millions of this information leaking by way of hack or some other spill to the public?

    people jest about "oh great now I'll lose body part X because of this" but isn't it much simpler than that? imo information security of this kind should be protected under existing medical privacy law(s). and not used for everyday auth by everyday joe.

    if the traditional password is done away with in future MS products, I'll finally make the leap off of using MS Windows forever.

    what's next, Windows auth via implanted microchip?

    1. Re:Who you gonna call? by martok · · Score: 1

      I imagine it would not be stored centrally but in the TPM where the TPM says yay or nae when presented with the image. In theory the TPM doesn't release the actual key even to the BIOS but rather just does the authentication. But who knows what kinds of attacks they can withstand when physically pulled off the mainboard.

    2. Re:Who you gonna call? by AchilleTalon · · Score: 3, Informative

      And the biometrics data hasn't have to be saved in clear anywhere, it can just be encrypted with a one-way crypto algorithm with the key to encrypt stored in the TPM. Then, the device collects the biometrics data, encrypt it with the key in the TPM and compare the resulting signature with the stored encrypted signature. If they match, you are the right guy, if not you are not authorized. Nobody can steal you biometrics data unless they temper with the hardware and introduce an hardware trojan horse. Getting the crypted data will not leak any useful information since it is equivalent to a very long password with very high entropy. A brute force method would take thousands years to crack it. And getting the key will not help since it is a one-way algorithm and the key is useless to decrypt.

      --
      Achille Talon
      Hop!
    3. Re:Who you gonna call? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Encrypt biometric data? Why? I see you are mixing authentication with passwords.

    4. Re:Who you gonna call? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You encrypt biometric data so that personal information isn't stored anywhere. Just a hash of it. Are you even following this conversation?

  7. Is it really more secure? by martok · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've seen cases recently where people crossing the border from one nation to another have been asked to enter their phone or laptop password for inspection. They are at this point free to refuse to divulge this information though there may be the obvious consequences. Using biometrics, would it not be possible for an attacker to simply force one to provide biometrics to unlock a device? What about other attacks such as a spouse unlocking a device using his/her partner's fingerprint while (s)he is asleep? I would think this would open up new security holes for the ones it fixes.

    1. Re:Is it really more secure? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      http://xkcd.com/538/

    2. Re:Is it really more secure? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not if it needs both biometric AND a regular password. Something you are, something you have, something you know.

      Now all we need is a USB crypto key standard, and have all three required to be present to log in. Plug in USB key, scan finger, provide password, and if they ALL match, you get access.

      Bonus points if the computer itself doesn't have any actual crypto algorithms on it, instead using the USB hardware to provide all keygen services. That way, you can verify your USB key is clean, and the rest of the system doesn't have to be trusted.

    3. Re:Is it really more secure? by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 2

      Keep in mind you always have the option of NOT using this feature if you're that paranoid, or are legitimately in danger of some goon cutting off your finger and using it to unlock your phone or computer. Also, if you're worried about your spouse secretly unlocking your phone while you're asleep and snooping on you, then you both have some bigger issues to work out.

      In the case of AppleID, all you have to do is reset the device or leave it unlocked for 48 hours, and you'll be required to use a password instead of the fingerprint.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    4. Re:Is it really more secure? by adolf · · Score: 1

      It's easier than you think.

      Just print out one (or more) of these images and use that as your "biometric" "faceprint."

      And, done! You shouldn't divulge such an image to those pinks, anyway, so you're covered on the religious morality front if push comes to shove.

    5. Re:Is it really more secure? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It is not about being paranoid. It's about being sensible with all we know today. Valuing your right to privacy is the cornerstone of free speech and democracy.

    6. Re:Is it really more secure? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      That's just for logging into your Slackware box.

    7. Re:Is it really more secure? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Biometrics is to make things easier, not safer. "Something you have" in a tiny little package called the Body, or its parts.

    8. Re:Is it really more secure? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Biometrics is to make things easier, not safer. "Something you have" in a tiny little package called the Body, or its parts.

      Traditionally, biometrics have been used to make things more secure not easier. When I worked for the government, the entrances to secure facilities required a smart card badge, a hand geometry scanner and a 6 digit pin to open the door. The really high security entrances additionally had an armed guard who would inspect your badge and compare the picture with your face, even when they recognize you because they see you every day.

      Except in very low security situations, I don't think it's wise to depend on biometrics as a replacement for traditional methods. But they can be a good additional layer of security.

  8. Is it optional? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can I still use passwords instead, if I want to?

  9. FakeNameGenerator vs. FakeBodyPartGenerator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sure a lot of you have found the fake name generator site, how long before there's a fakebodypartprint site?

    i guess John the Ripper for *nix would really be a sick name if it matured into using photo indexes of prints vs. dictionaries.

  10. They will need a fallback mechanism... by HalAtWork · · Score: 2

    ...in case you're in an accident and your hand is cut off, or your face needs to be reconstructed, or whatever else that could happen. That mechanism better be secure as well, and what will it rely on, another password?

    1. Re:They will need a fallback mechanism... by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 2

      Heh, I think a more common scenario would be "the touch sensor isn't working because it's very cold out, or my hands are too dry to get a reading". No need for such dramatic examples. Search for "touchID cold weather" to see what I mean. Systems (like TouchID) generally let you try a few times with biometrics, and if that doesn't work, then you need to enter your passcode as a fallback.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    2. Re:They will need a fallback mechanism... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> ...in case you're in an accident and your hand is cut off
      Then you need a backup password you can type with one hand, ie using only one side of the keyboard, which makes it much less secure ( half charset)
      You need in fact one for each half of the keyboard.

    3. Re:They will need a fallback mechanism... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Not knowing much about fingerprint scanners, how much of a cut would it take to cause the recognition to fail? (I'd also rather not take off an adhesive bandage every time I needed to log on.)

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  11. through the roof by guygo · · Score: 1

    You can expect the "I got locked out of my machine" help calls to go through the roof. Great.

  12. Breathy excitement -- perfumed wart removal creme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "not only is Windows Hello more convenient than typing a password—it’s more secure!"
    My gosh, wow!

    " ...there will be plenty of exciting new Windows 10 devices to choose from..."
    Keen! Peachy! ... It’s a solution that government, defense, financial, health care and other related organizations will use to enhance their overall security, with a simple experience designed to delight.
    Well, dag my dogs! Delightful!

  13. I see your Hello and raise you a Goodbye! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's time to start donating to open source projects, especially solid Linux Distributions.

  14. Hello by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

    Evidently they did not consult Firefox on the name.

    My laptop way back in 2007 running XP had a finger scanner for logins and the like. I guess it's nice if there's a UI/Authentication API standardized for which vendors only need to plugin in a hardware implementation.

  15. Windows Hello? by thisisauniqueid · · Score: 5, Funny

    Could they have picked a worse name? "Windows Hello" reminds me of all the awkward conversations I had with nontechnical Windows users about their "My Documents" folder. "Open My Documents." "Your documents?" "No, your My Documents." "My your documents?" "NO!..."

    1. Re:Windows Hello? by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 2

      Could they have picked a worse name? "Windows Hello" reminds me of all the awkward conversations I had with nontechnical Windows users about their "My Documents" folder. "Open My Documents." "Your documents?" "No, your My Documents." "My your documents?" "NO!..."

      That's fine. Windows Hello is for the same users.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    2. Re:Windows Hello? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      The reason it's called hello is because it has facial recognition to recognize you as soon as you look at it. Then it will tell you hello, and your name. Really.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:Windows Hello? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welcome to Microsoft Hell. This is what everyone will feel when their biometric no longer works and they have no password to override. Many of us have been in this place before and is why we no longer trust or use M$ products.

  16. nope by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    If I can log in by singing Total Eclipse of the Heart, that'd be pretty cool. Other than that, giving people two ways to log in instead of one is ridiculous and a horrible idea. It's always biometrics + password backup.

    1. Re:nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh God, yes please! The thought of an office full of IT professionals who can't sing to save their lives (myself included) having to serenade their computers every morning is comedy gold!

  17. One and done by dirk · · Score: 2

    Passwords are not a perfect solution, no one denies that. But overall, they are a good solution, especially when combined with something like and RSA key or Google authentication. Biometrics seems easier and more secure, and on the face it is. The issue with biometrics is that once there is a way around it, there is no way to change it. So you fingerprint is secure today. But tomorrow someone comes up with a way to fake your fingerprint. You are now stuck because you can't change you fingerprint. With a password, if it is hacked you can change it. With biometrics, if they are hacked you are entirely screwed because it can't be changed (which is the point of biometrics). Sorry, I'll stick with passwords for now.

    --

    "Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
    1. Re:One and done by Jeremi · · Score: 2

      One presumes that eventually we will all be using multi-factor authentication to log in.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    2. Re:One and done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's all about information--having the right information at the right time.

      I really applaud Microsoft for trying different approaches to passwords--it seems like they're making a good effort to tackle an alternative to passwords, which are really not very efficient.

      You're right about the downsides of biometrics, though. It's basically like having a password that's really easy to use, and very complex, but can never be changed. It's sort of like saying "Hey--we're going to give you a perfectly random 1000-digit string as a password, and you don't have to type it in--just wave your RFID near the computer. But you have to use it for everything and you can never change it."

      The problems with passwords is in their ease of use, not their function or role. Ideally we'd see something like a password fob or card that you just wave or swipe, that you can change, or that you could have multiple passwords from, depending on the type of site. A 1000-digit random string that's replaceable, rather than irreplaceable.

      I sort of see biometrics as inevitable, though. Maybe not on its own, but in combination with other things.

      My biggest worry, other than biometrics being over-relied on, is the IP/patent mess that could accrue. Like Microsoft claiming they had invented biometrics for all intents and purposes, or that the use of it to log into an OS is somehow some innovation above and beyond biometrics as a principle. When Apple is able to successfully sue over a rectangular tablet, we've entered a brave new world of restrictions on free speech and ideas.

    3. Re: One and done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go fuck yourself, I told them to turn. That multifactor shit off at work, andit is being g turned off. No one gives a fuck about your shifty time spent staring at a screen, get over it

    4. Re: One and done by msobkow · · Score: 1

      *LMAO* And we're to believe that a cursing, borderline illiterate who can't put together a proper sentence has a say in corporate policy!

      Thanks for the laugh, AC. I needed a giggle.

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    5. Re:One and done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are mixing authentication with "what you have". "What you have" is a password. Authentication is who you are (biometrics). No need to mix these two concepts of reality, thanks.

    6. Re:One and done by ewibble · · Score: 1

      One would presume NOT since the summary states:

      the ideal scenario here would be for you to simply look at or touch a new device running Windows 10 and to be immediately signed in

    7. Re:One and done by ewibble · · Score: 1

      also biometrics don't really lend themselves to encryption, since they slightly change each time so your encryption key changes each time.

      You could possibly hash that key an in a way that it doesn't change but then storing the encryption key on the device kind of defeats the purpose of encryption.

      Also if any body scanned your fingerprint/DNA whatever all you encryption is now compromised.

      Would you really be willing to log into a web site with your fingerprint, even your bank, if doing so would immediately grant them access to every other thing you logged into.

    8. Re:One and done by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The other problem is that it's much easier to have multiple copies of a password than a finger. If you injure your finger, or do a lot of bricklaying or something, how do you log in?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  18. I've yet to read of a *good* biometric scanner by msobkow · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've been reading about biometric scanners for over a decade now, starting with the fingerprint reader bar that was on old IBM Thinkpads.

    Every single attempt at cheap biometric security has been demonstrated to be insecure or unreliable. When I got my Lenovo laptop, the first thing I uninstalled was their camera-using face scanner software, because I'd read about how easy it was to hack with a photo of the person to be identified.

    Sure, there are real biometric devices out there such as government iris scanners and such, but those are not cheap enough for mass deployment. Until such high reliability security devices are available to the consumer at a sane price, I'm going to stick with good old fashioned passwords.

    Besides, getting into the machine is only the first step. All that would gain you access to is some personal photographs and documents. Everything else would require access to the keystore and the key passwords for accessing remote servers, so I'm still relatively comfortable that someone hacking my password isn't that great a risk.

    I'm also perfectly comfortable with "da goobernmint" scanning my system (with a warrant), because all my "secure" data resides elsewhere, and they won't find so much as a PDF of a bank account statement on the box itself.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:I've yet to read of a *good* biometric scanner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm also perfectly comfortable with "da goobernmint" scanning my system (with a warrant), because all my "secure" data resides elsewhere, and they won't find so much as a PDF of a bank account statement on the box itself.

      Now they know you have extra data stored somewhere because you shouted it in Slashdot.

    2. Re:I've yet to read of a *good* biometric scanner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now they know you have extra data stored somewhere because you shouted it in Slashdot.

      That doesn't matter. They already know what data everyone has and where they keep it and they can get it any time they want. One cannot stop a determined attacker and there are few more determined or resourceful than the NSA and their "Equation Group" hacker team. Why do you suppose that the terrorists have resorted to hand written messages on paper and trusted couriers? Because they think that's efficient?

  19. Passwords are insecure if you are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Passwords are insecure if you are stupid and use crap passwords.

    This system, nor stupidly complex passwords, will stop a hacked DB from leaking.

    It is trivial to create huge passwords using sentences and numeral separators instead of spaces. (said numeral wrapping if you reach the end before your sentence ends.)
    Throw a non-dictionary word or few in there, the universe will die before it gets cracked.

    Microsoft, going on about security of passwords, is priceless considering they fucking gimped Hotmail by limiting password length. (and ironically made it impossible for me to login even when I DO truncate my long password. Great one you IDIOTS, not that I cared, Hotmail is/was trash)
    Biometrics are shit. I can't wait for this fad to die. Again. Like 3D.

    1. Re:Passwords are insecure if you are stupid. by rubycodez · · Score: 2

      You long passwords and the biometrics all will sucumb to the $5 wrench attack, or the five year incarceration threat by government goon

    2. Re: Passwords are insecure if you are stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      But (hopefully) secure from all remote attacks. Kinda the whole idea, I thought.

    3. Re:Passwords are insecure if you are stupid. by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      You long passwords and the biometrics all will sucumb to the $5 wrench attack, or the five year incarceration threat by government goon

      A security feature does not have to be perfect to still provide value. If you think about it, almost all security features have some weaknesses or ways to bypass them.

    4. Re:Passwords are insecure if you are stupid. by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      How about a setup where it will shred your data, or just present an empty system, if you log on with a different finger? i.e. right index erases the box, left index does regular logon

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    5. Re:Passwords are insecure if you are stupid. by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      The goon with the $5 wrench is not pleased. "Ouch time" -- Jarjar

      If dealing with fed goon, obstruction of justice can get 20 years in federal pound-your-ass prison plus fines

  20. I don't understand their concept of security by MeNeXT · · Score: 1

    The W10 preview is all one big browser which connects to MS and requires an MS id to be of any use unless you download third party software. Mail needs an MS id. Calendar need an MS id and so on and so on. Their privacy policy basically states that you have none and they and their affiliates can do as they please. So why even bother pretending that the information is locked when it will already be stored on their servers and can be accessed without your knowledge.

    On another note what good is biometrics if the device can be accessed physically? Is the data encrypted? Can I simply show a picture to the camera? Can my finger be held and swiped? I haven't seen a consumer grade biometrics solution that can't be tricked or worked around. At least with a PIN I enter it wrong three times and bye bye data.

    --
    DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
  21. Considering I can login to several Dell laptops... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that I tried, no. We will not be using this. To be fair, I think I've logged into five out of the over two hundred I've tried, but that's still a security problem.

  22. Any identifying information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    collected by Windows and the device, will be passed on to NSA etc., so as to keep building better and more complete profiles and "timelines" of people and Internet users everywhere, this is worth pointing out.

    1. Re:Any identifying information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      collected by Windows and the device, will be passed on to NSA etc., so as to keep building better and more complete profiles and "timelines" of people and Internet users everywhere, this is worth pointing out.

      It all fucking sucks . Computers, Internet, etc

  23. Coming Soon: Windows Goodbye by vomitology · · Score: 1

    ...and for the uber-security concious, the bio-readers will contain a small blowdart laced with Anthrax/SARS/poop/whatever. If the wrong person tries to log into your device, PFFT! Poop in the eye!

    --
    ~Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit, but Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad.
    1. Re:Coming Soon: Windows Goodbye by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reminds me of a scene in one of the Robocop movies in which a man tries to seal a car, and the car's security system kills him.

  24. Physical security = Zero security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who is Microsoft trying to fool?

    Also, just call it Windows 8.2.

  25. Re:How will they standardize readings across devic by gl4ss · · Score: 1

    I'd rather them not try do that.

    Imagine logging in with just a picture of the fingerprint from a cup. no access to the machine even - all you start with is that cup. or a picture of the dude.

    like, if it would log in just by the way you look.. just run a video to the computer of the guy. and what if you don't want to open the computer, for whatever reason?

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  26. repair person by wendyo · · Score: 2

    How will I log into computers that customers bring to my store. How will I admin the hundreds of computers that see at customer locations?

    1. Re:repair person by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      Identical to win 7.

    2. Re:repair person by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They would set up a password for those cases. Pretty simple really.

  27. And they will own the central and revocation keys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Take a good look at the underlying "Palladium" security software, confusingly retitled "Trusted Computing".

    Microsoft owns the master keys. Microsoft owns your hardware, softwrae, and personal keys, which they report back to the mothership and keep in "escrow. And they have no public policy for when, how or if they turn those keys over or revoke your own personal keys at the request of the US government, the Chinese government, their own business managers to screw with competitors personal systems, or the that crazy guy Fred who just got a job as a janitor and cleans the room with the computers with the screens left open with access to the keys.

    Yeah, I really trust them to protect biometric identification of my every login and personal correspondence.

  28. Windows 11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Comes with a rectal probe.

  29. enterprise grade security? ...right by l3v1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "delivering enterprise grade security and privacy"

    Somewhat offtopic: I'd so wish people would stop flinging this phrase around, like it would actually exist... That enterprise grade security has failed millions of people over the years, sometimes quite spectacularly. Adding a heuristic set of mixed-up unreliable biometrics won't change that, but it will make your life hell, when it fails (as it inevitably will). All that incorporated into an OS that likes to call home more often than an average person calls their Mom :)) So, good luck with all that :))

    --
    I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
  30. Re:Considering I can login to several Dell laptops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you think that is bad, try using one as the user ID and the password. We did that, and due to the birthday paradox, we had quite a few employees that logged in as the wrong user. That was with a Dell Latitude D820 in 2008 so maybe the scanner is better now, but then it was terrible.

  31. This won't end well... by hyades1 · · Score: 1

    "The software analyzes input from such hardware as fingerprint scanners and infrared sensors to make sure that you are you and not some impostor, and then signs you in without requiring you to enter a password.

    Fabulous. So in the Brave New World of Windows Hello, a "hacker" is a guy with an axe and a microwave.

    And I'm the one they call "Lefty".

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  32. Biometric Login by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Introducing the new Microsoft Biometric Login Dildo. It identifies you by your anal signature.....or whatever....

  33. cant concentrate becuase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they installed ultrasonic harassment coming from computer every 3-4 minutes in the note of e/f

  34. Dear Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I trust you at Microsoft to create an operating system that sort of work, I do NOT trust you guys at Microsoft to guard or guarantee my privacy, nor offer proper security.

    I pretty much see Microsoft and the Windows products as some kind of NSA tool at this point in time. :(

  35. You GOT to be kidding me M$! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To all M$ management,

    We the users of our product have no interest in your attempts to turn it into a walled garden. This means we do not want you to have access to personal information like retina scans and fingerprints.
    It also means most of us have no interest in your live accounts. I got one of those accounts when hotmail stopped (I know, hotmail, but everyone needs a spam mail address right?) and ever since M$ took them in they suddenly need a different E-mail address, telephone numbers and other personal information I don't want any company to know. specially not big companies with so many MBAS's employed that all ethics went out the window ages ago.

    Furthermore, as users of your product we find you should be spending much more time on making your product stable, fast and lightweight rather then trying to bury us all in useless whistles and bells.All users of your products know they crash with frightening regularity. Maybe instead of wasting all this cash on useless bells and whistles, you might invest in actually adding value to your product.

    Now if M$ management MBA's can be somehow convinced to stop trying to enter irrational stupidity into the software product (lynching anyone;) MBA's don't have souls and therefore we can't be sued right ;) ) the technically capable people in M$ may yet save at least some of win 10.

    Full disclosure, yes indeed I own a torch and pitchfork shop, why do you ask ;)

  36. Not much to say by Thraxy · · Score: 2

    It sounds like a piece of shit.

  37. Law Enforcement/Customs/etc by austinpoet · · Score: 1

    People are sometimes being compelled to give up their passwords for devices when they cross borders. This could potentially require a person to provide his fingerprint (already required to cross some borders, for some people) and his/her face/voice.

    I think this could make it easier for governments to get in your knickers.

  38. New releases without much changes by watchcriclive1111 · · Score: 1

    Microsoft always does this... There are always new versions coming up without actually introducing meaningful changes that really matter.

  39. Luther Blissett by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every time you are forced to give a name to make an account use "Luther Blissett"

  40. Are "innovations" in Windows even relevant anymore by QuietLagoon · · Score: 2

    Windows is a dying breed. Most of its usage is just old PCs in businesses trying to do what they have been doing for years. Is anyone really going to care about innovation that is based upon the Windows platform?

  41. Genius! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Genius, lets replace a possibly insecure typed password that can be easily changed if it is compromised with a relatively easy to bypass biometric sensor with a "password" (fingerprint, image, etc) that can't be changed at all. That'll improve security for sure!

  42. Re:Are "innovations" in Windows even relevant anym by Entropius · · Score: 1

    "Trying to do what they have been doing for years" also means "running some software without needing or wanting anything from the OS rather than a window manager, device drivers, a filesystem, and a networking stack". Just because the "platform" isn't "innovating" doesn't mean that people don't run nifty software on it.

    Most of the frustration with Windows comes from trying to get the Microsoft marketing bullshit to fuck off so we can use computers for what computers are for: running software.

  43. Re:Are "innovations" in Windows even relevant anym by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

    ... Just because the "platform" isn't "innovating" doesn't mean that people don't run nifty software on it....

    I agree. When I asked if innovation in Windows was relevant, I was referring to innovation in the Windows OS itself, not the apps that run on it.

  44. not after XBox One by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No thanks. Not after the annoyance that is XBox One. They really push you to have an account per person, and to be recognized by Kinect (yes it falls through to password but it's a major pain on the game console). I've had to train my kids where to sit, what they are allowed to be doing or wearing, and how to reset the Kinect, in order to play their games.

  45. Re:Are "innovations" in Windows even relevant anym by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 1

    Most of the "innovations" are actually detrimental to corporate users who simply are trying to keep everything running and they don't want to climb a learning curve just to get back to their former level of productivity. But that is what MS is pushing. Tinkering under the hood to improve performance is one thing. Arguably Windows 8 is a good OS under a god-awful and painful GUI. Messing with GUIs is probably Microsoft's biggest error. They should provide different GUIs for different installations, but provide a freakling XP/Win7 GUI wrapper for the folks simply trying to get work done on a desktop that have been using that sort of interface for 20+ years.

    --

    Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

    Vote for Bernie in 2016!

  46. Re:How will they standardize readings across devic by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    If you have no direct physical access to the machine, all you have to authenticate by is the picture or processed picture of your fingerprint or selected other body part.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  47. This is Phase I :) by hamsterz1 · · Score: 1

    This is just the beginning of a long push, to get us ALL hooked into the NWO technocracy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...