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.

17 of 138 comments (clear)

  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 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.

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

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

    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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
    7. 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.

    8. 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!

    9. 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.

    10. 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.

    11. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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!..."

  4. 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!
  5. 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.
  6. 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.