Slashdot Mirror
'Dear Apple, The iPhone X and Face ID Are Orwellian and Creepy' (hackernoon.com)
Trent Lapinski from Hacker Noon writes an informal letter to Apple, asking "who the hell actually asked for Face ID?" and calling the iPhone X and new face-scanning security measure "Orwellian" and "creepy": For the company that famously used 1984 in its advertising to usher in a new era of personal computing, it is pretty ironic that 30+ years later they would announce technology that has the potential to eliminate global privacy. I've been waiting 10-years since the first iPhone was announced for a full-screen device that is both smaller in my hand but has a larger display and higher capacity battery. However, I do not want these features at the cost of my privacy, and the privacy of those around me. While the ease of use and user experience of Face ID is apparent, I am not questioning that, the privacy concerns are paramount in today's world of consistent security breaches. Given what we know from Wikileaks Vault7 and the CIA / NSA capabilities to hijack any iPhone, including any sensor on the phone, the very thought of handing any government a facial ID system for them to hack into is a gift the world may never be able to return. Face ID will have lasting privacy implications from 2017 moving forward, and I'm pretty sure I am not alone in not wanting to participate.
The fact of the matter is the iPhone X does not need Face ID, Apple could have easily put a Touch ID sensor on the back of the phone for authentication (who doesn't place their finger on the back of their phone?). I mean imagine how cool it would be to put your finger on the Apple logo on the back of your iPhone for Touch ID? It would have been a highly marketable product feature that is equally as effective as Face ID without the escalating Orwellian privacy implications. [...] For Face ID to work, the iPhone X actively has to scan faces looking for its owner when locked. This means anyone within a several foot range of an iPhone X will get their face scanned by other people's phones and that's just creepy.
The fact of the matter is the iPhone X does not need Face ID, Apple could have easily put a Touch ID sensor on the back of the phone for authentication (who doesn't place their finger on the back of their phone?). I mean imagine how cool it would be to put your finger on the Apple logo on the back of your iPhone for Touch ID? It would have been a highly marketable product feature that is equally as effective as Face ID without the escalating Orwellian privacy implications. [...] For Face ID to work, the iPhone X actively has to scan faces looking for its owner when locked. This means anyone within a several foot range of an iPhone X will get their face scanned by other people's phones and that's just creepy.
Who asked for the original Macintosh or iPhone either? People often don't know what they've been missing out on until you show it to them. This person obviously doesn't understand Apple's history and the way they operate.
This article is so stupid. The author clearly has no idea how existing biometrics that Apple offers work. Touch ID stores information in a secure element, and nowhere else. No cloud, no device transfer methods, nothing - it is On Device only. Face ID is no different. In fact, it doesnâ(TM)t even store images of your face - it reduces your faceâ(TM)s geometry to a mathematical equation that is literally impossible to reverse engineer, due to the high levels of iOS hardware security. Read the damn iOS Security Guide, published and updated by Apple - it is FULL if information on how this stuff works, how keys are handled, how the Secure Enclave works, how encryption works across the OS and user data, itâ(TM)s a great read and would put these inane âoefearsâ to rest simply by understanding how it works. âoePeoples will always fear what they donâ(TM)t understandâ
A good enough mask or disguise can open your devices now.
I don't read AC
If Mr. Lapinski (the blogger) thinks this will have any significant effect on governments' efforts and success to incorporate facial recognition in the approaching Orwellian utopia, then he is nuts.
On the other hand, I agree that a touch ID on the back would have been nicer. Mostly because I don't want to have to aim my phone in a certain direction for it to unlock.
Apple is yet another globalist corp who will happily sell this capability to totalitarian governments while reeeeeeing about some imagined insult against the LGBTQIA+$Ë?! "community".
This guy is just making stuff up. First off, he has no idea if people around the phone owner also get scanned. Secondly, Apple doesn't take a picture of anyone, only a hash of a mathematical representation of the 3D scan of the facial contours created from the 3D projector. And finally, it doesn't send that (irreversible) hash anywhere - it stores it internally in the Secure Enclave, so it wouldn't even matter if they *where* scanning other faces.
Get a grip, man, I'm sure you can find other things to hate them for, you don't have to make stuff up!
Why didn't anyone hate on Samsung for *actually* taking pictures?
No one is forcing you to use the sensor and a simple piece of tape or a case can obscure it. To be honest the cops forcing people to touch unlock thier phones is probably what moved apple to this approach and the reason I've never used the touch sensor. The touch sensor was actually a bigger security hole because it appears they won't yet be able to force you to facial unlock the phone. I'll never use the facial scanner if I do get one, however a miniature infrared lidar sensor in my phone would have really badass potential - in my opinion an overlooked major innovation.
I've been thinking about the coming sensor wave for some time, and what I've concluded is this: give people something genuinely more convenient, and they will trade it for slightly more risk, every time. It won't even be close.
Why? Because people intuitively want to use ALL their senses to control their environment. It's something they've been doing their entire lives, and your typical computer interface really stinks by comparison. Heck, even something mundane like driving a car provides a hugely richer control experience than using any smartphone app you can name.
Computer-human interfaces suck. You can't fight progress in this area.
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
The security services have voice prints if a person is within 4 hops of anyone of interest to any security service.
Use a pay phone, VOIP, cell phone, new cell phone, that older cell phone that can still connect...
The security services don't care as long as the interesting person is still using a service that offers collect it all access.
The PRISM surveillance program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... showed what could be done.
New or old hardware, the trick is keeping the wider population talking. Any network, any device is part of collect it all.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Call the wahmbulamce. Donâ(TM)t like the FaceID feature or are worried about the privacy concerns? Donâ(TM)t buy the iPhone X. Or, but it and just use a passcode. Problem solved.
If I can understand this guy's ramblings, he doesn't like that FaceID is so powerful, and he wishes he could unlock his iPhone X another way.
So stick some tape over the front facing camera and use a passcode. Get over it. People have been doing this with their laptop cameras for years.
Even if his argument was based in reality, which I'm not sure it is, there's a well-known work-around.
While the majority of the world perpetually hunched over their phones ... tap tap tap tap ... why would typing a few characters to access ones phone be such a burden?
Here is a better idea Apple: invent a phone that auto-reads and responds to Facebook and Twitter drivel.
I believe it was mentioned in the keynote that FaceID is optional. That you could configure the phone for a passcode. Four digit passcodes are also only a default, longer passcodes an option.
Can you turn off facial recognition as the default and have it go to password only from the get go with no failback to facial recognition?
If yes, then I don't see a privacy problem. From the sound of things, facial recognition is less than passcode, but better than fingerprint recognition which is so easily worked around.
It's also available for Microsoft Surface devices which just goes to show how much things have changed. Now it's no problem when MS does it but when Apple does it's "Orwellian and creepy".
Don't buy it.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it dissolve.
The FBI is probably giggling themselves to sleep at the thought of all the biometric facial data they'll have soon.
We already know biometrics aren't protected by the fifth amendment so law enforcement everywhere is just as giddy.
Is it really that difficult to key in a password ?
Does anyone trust their phone enough to keep sensitive data of any kind on / or accessible from it ?
What's next, a DNA sample ?
Dear Apple and Microsoft users. Maybe if you care about freedoms, you should be supporting platforms which respect you as a user and support your right to privacy and freedom. Sincerely, someone who doesn't compromise their integrity by using systems which are broken by design. All of this was foretold, all of this was preventable, and yet people chose to vote against their own interests with their wallets, and they now reap what they have sown.
"who doesn't place their finger on the back of their phone?"
Me, I have my phone in a cover. Having touch ID on the back of a phone is just bloody stupid
Faceid is the first step to 3d modeling everything. This is a cut rate version of 3d laser scanners that have been out for years and use in land surveying. Now, everyone will have a highly accurate 3d modeller in their hand to scan things and send the data off with.. need a car part, scan it with face ID, send it to manufacturer, get product of right size. Scan tight holes for shape and deformation. The sky is the limit. Faceid isn't the purpose. The purpose is to drive another business, they just have to get the installed base up before their courage to unlock the sensor to other apps is allowed to show. Trojan horse.
"This means anyone within a several foot range of an iPhone X will get their face scanned by other people's phones and that's just creepy."
Right. So when you take *your* phone out, it's camera isn't also scanning every single other person in visual range of its one or perhaps two cameras?? And if hacked, transmitting all that sound and video to the hackers? That's *your* phone sir, assuming you have a modern smartphone of any kind!
Doesn't it feel like Apple is now the opposite side of their '1984' Mac ad, and is the 'mainstream Big Brother' rather than the plucky woman throwing the hammer? :-)
Take back reality kiddos! Before Big Brother beats you down!
when October 31st rolls around and everyone who has an iPhone 10 and is wearing a mask discovers that they have to take off part of their costume just to make a phone call. If part of their get-up is heavily applied makeup and/or latex, they may not be able to use their phones at all without pretty much destroying their disguise. In addition to Hallowe'en there are also Mardi Gras, parades, high school plays, and on and on.
A phone that's constantly scanning even strangers' faces without their consent is rude, obnoxious, insidious, and invasive. A phone that its owner might not be able to use while he or she is wearing a mask or heavy makeup, is just plain stupid. Way to go Apple!
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
And the iPhoneHoles aren't any worse than the GlassHoles.
Don't like face ID?
Use a passcode. Or no security at all...
JunkID (tm) has all the same features as FaceID but with your junk.
[queue trendy music that makes oneself excited]
For the first time you can legally expose your junk while you pay for something.
If you you are at that park, strolling by the swing set, you can expose your junk to take that photo or answer that call while you hand out puppies.
Instagram with JunkID was never been better as you can watermark your posts with a snapshot of your junk.
I hear it works with trojan and/or fully shaved
Fragrance is an all new sensory processing unit built into the a11 silicon. Download the Fragrance Universal Core Kit (FUCK) through the apple store to start developing now.
OMG, this door thing is creepy. There's a window where someone can look at me but I can't look at them, and they need to actually let me in! I can't just walk into a cave anymore! WTF!
Never mind the detail that the iPhone X facial recognition is a LOT more complex than to my knowledge any other customer level gadget out there
prove it by providing technical facts, not iPropaganda.
Like the fact that it has special hardware for detecting the 3D topology of your face, a 3D depth map. That it is *not* simply looking at a 2D image as other current facial recognition software does, as the 8-9 year old platforms referenced did.
"Face ID
With the Home button and Touch ID gone, Apple's new way of unlocking the iPhone X is called Face ID. The feature uses the new front-facing camera setup, which includes the lens, a new IR camera, a flood illuminator, dot projector, and ambient light sensor, along with 3D-sensing facial recognition software to identify your face and unlock the handset. This system virtually projects 30,000 IR dots on your face that are then stored on the smartphone. The phone references that dot-map whenever you look at the front of the device so it can identify you as the correct owner and unlock itself. Apple is calling the new technology system that enables Face ID its "True Depth Camera system.""
https://arstechnica.com/gadget...
but you can't burn your face (or you shouldn't). How hard would it be to 3d print a missing dead guy's face? They'll have the data for it soon. Someone should make a Game of Thrones God of many faces parody for this. And you know, Facefarm is somehow going to find a way to be 5x's more creepy with this tech than Apple some how. They always find a way. I say we use our private parts to unlock our phones. I'd actually feel safer and it's not like the iPhone 11 won't be getting semen samples next, so mind as well.
I wonder if the author minds that every store that he shops in and restaurant that he visits records his face on their video surveillance systems? Sure, maybe it's 2D instead of 3D, but much more pervasive.
I'll agree with the author with one single thing: it really isn't good that the face recognition tech is getting normalized and spread out as much, which is something that Apple tends to do through it's cult like fanbase and media love affair.
But let's be realistic for a moment here. First of all, public security cameras are already a thing, plus dashcams in some countries. And plenty of relatively good software for face recognition and identification are already out there, in real time and without any need for special cameras. In fact, we're already over face recognition and now encroaching on general recognition which is a full complexity step beyond it. Software that can use real time input of regular cameras to identify not only face, but also objects, animals, landscapes, even with some interpretation about the data. Not only that, the tech and code is already open source:
https://pjreddie.com/darknet/y...
For this particular application of surveillance technology, Apple isn't going to make much of a difference with a Face ID thing in their smartphones... we're already past Orwellian surveillance.
Second, iPhone X isn't even the first to do it. Samsung already had both face recognition and iris recognition in the failed Note S7, current S8, Note 8 and one Galaxy Tab. Not to mention how Microsoft came with Windows Hello years ago. So the timeframe for panicking has already passed if it's about personal devices with facial scanners.
The tech is already here, and no matter what one or another company does, it will be developed and used. Unfortunately, governments, policies and law hasn't quite catched up to the dangers of so much erosion of privacy, but we'll eventually have to get there, probably not without a very horrible round of feeling the consequences of living in a society that doesn't have almost any privacy protection anymore.
But like I said, it's too late to panic. In fact, it's the sort of short sightedness that lead us to this situation. If people are really feeling creeped out only now because Apple released some new phone with a whole bunch of old tech borrowed from past devices, then people are really trailing behind times.
Apple even sometimes tries to save face posing as a costumer friendly corporation that cares for stuff like privacy, but that's not where people should be looking at. It's governments, governmental agencies, the frequent overstepping of citizens rights, all the revelations that came from multiple whistleblower cases... you see, nothing is changing. There is no public outcry and outrage. The Snowden leaks would have to have ended in a complete revolution and overturning of political power to stop something like an Orwellian dystopia. It's too late now. It certainly won't be as obvious or as clear as in, say, the 1984 novel, but it's already happening, make no mistake.
You can have absolute certainty that DARPA is probably already funding multiple projects for robots and cameras with advanced facial and object recognition cameras to be potentially deployed in several scenarios in the future. You can bet that autonomous cars in the future will do double duty in identifying people and potential criminal scenarios. We already live in a suveillance state, and things are only going to get worse, particularly with governments that are all about bravado, show of strength, and activelly persecuting citizens inside of their own nation because of their skin color or previous nationality. Apple is but a drop in the ocean.
The OP is clearly ignorant of how the secure enclave works, or really any of the concept of operations of the Touch ID and/or Face ID sensors. Touch ID and Face ID both require the setting of a minimum 6 digit passcode for the device, as a backstop for the biometric sensor. The passcode is required for unlock after a device is rebooted, if the device ever goes more than 48 hours without being unlocked, and after 5 consecutive unsuccessful unlock attempts using the biometric sensor. FFS Craig Federighi (unintentionally) demoed this functionality during the damned keynote! Once the phone starts making you use the passcode, it only accepts passcode input from the touchscreen, and after 5 consecutive incorrect passcode inputs starts to impose increasingly long cool downs before the 6th and subsequent attempts.
Though I don't recall it being specifically addressed in the keynote, I can only imagine the Face ID sensor and secure enclave authenticate to each other in a manner similar to the way the Touch ID sensor does, as a countermeasure against the sensor being replaced with a alternative device with malicious functionality.
It recently leaked that - in the opening scene of Game Of Thrones Season 8, we'll see Arya Stark successfully unlock Littlefinger's iPhone X using his face.
#DeleteChrome
Arrested Development had prior art on this.
#DeleteChrome
don't buy it. Yeah, the chance that enough people will refuse to buy the device due to privacy invasion feature X or Y will stop them. But you have done as much as you can in the situation. Perhaps switch to another phone that doesn't have a similar feature... hmm, I'm sure someone can suggest a modern phone without this feature. Or at least one that doesn't force you to use the face unlock...unlike the iphone. Or rather, just use this phone and set it up exactly like the Android!
Turn off facelock and be done with it. Or switch and stop bitching. Everyone wanted competition. Now, no one wants to make use of it.
OMG facts!
It will come with LickID. You lick the screen and it will analyze your DNA to check your authentication.
If the NSA can already hack the sensors on the phone, wouldn't they be able to pull pics from any front-facing camera app and not just the facial recognition?
Also, has anyone noticed how California centric Apple technology is? Face recognition assumes no one ever covers their face with a scarf, hat, or hood. Fingerprint and touch screen technology that assumes no one ever needs to wear gloves. Waterproofing to deal with dropping the phone into a toilet but not rain or snow.
of course Not. iPple milk their lemmings with a little bit here and a little bit there else why would you buy yet another next year? my few friends -- with iPple phones -- constantly complain about the limitation of their phone and how they need a new one. me, I only nod in agreement anymore.
They could have done Ass ID
Won't somebody please think of the security of identical twins! How will the good twin ever get over the loss of not being able to use iFace without giving his evil twin brother access to his Twitter account.
----------------------------------- My Other Sig Is Hilarious -----------------------------------
But we sure are living in the Brave New World.
I honestly don't get it. And I would really love to understand, I do.
What I can observe is that iPhones lose features that I would actually use and gain features that I can't really identify a sensible use for. In other words, to me they become inferior with every incarnation.
I can only assume that this is not the case in general, because the newer models of iPhones still sell in approximately the same number as the older models did when they came out. There has to be a reason for this. And please refrain from trolling like "because people are dumb", that's rarely the case. There are certainly cases of people who'd buy anything from brand X because ... reasons, but after 2-3 models of getting increasingly inferior products, they would stop doing it. So they actually must deem those products satisfactory.
And this is the part I don't get.
Do people really want these features? The unlock-by-fingerprint, unlock-by-face and the other recent additions that I'd call gimmicks at best and security risks at worst? While at the same time not missing the ability to attach headphones, replace the battery (or any part for that matter), use the software of their choice instead of what the vendor deems "appropriate" and so many other things where I simply cannot fathom why one would put up with it.
What the hell is the appeal of this thing? I got used to not fully understanding the motivation humans have, but why they actually consider newer models of iPhones superior to their (in my opinion) more versatile and useful older models completely puzzles me.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Not creepy in my opinion, but many security experts doubt that its any more secure then a finger print reader or other biometric means of authentication. Seeing as you don't have much choice with the iPhone X. This to me is the biggest negative on the most expensive iPhone yet. If the facial thing doesn't work for you, then your back to a PIN code.
The Apple website (on several occasions) rejects my negative comments. Usually I'll be trying to describe my problem and the context, but at some point I apparently become too negative and the Apple website says it can't save the draft, and once that happens, whatever I've written cannot be posted. Doesn't seem possible to undo or reset the flag, whatever it is.
Has anyone else experienced this? If you are asking a question or making a comment in the Apple "Discussions", but your tone becomes too negative, then your comment suddenly becomes unpublishable? I suppose it could be based on human moderation, but I know that some of the sentiment analysis systems are becoming powerful enough to do it automatically without expensive and clumsy human beings in the loop.
Details of my most recent experience at https://slashdot.org/journal/2..., but this isn't the first time I've seen it. I think Apple has decided they need to control the tone of discussions or no one will pay $1,000 for their latest and greatest iPhone.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
I think your "future" has already arrive on the Apple website. If you get too negative, then your comment will be blocked. I think it's based on automatic sentiment analysis, but there might be a personalized element there, based on my prior negative comments. Most of them involved annoying problems with the voice dictation. I posted a longer description elsewhere in this discussion, but your comment was the only one to mention censorship.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
Using words like Orwellian and Creepy is pseudo-intellectual hipster's bullshit.
but nobody is forcing anybody to use or buy the new iPhone X. concerned about this tech? fine, then don't buy this device!
could be he wrote it to make people aware, but people don't care.
Anyone that has paid attention the last 2 decades would have realized the NSA were boiling frogs. No, the FaceID feature isn't big brother. Big brother happened more than a decade back, he just didn't notice it until now. When the internet first appeared in college, it was cool. At the same time I realized it was going to be one of the best tools for the NSA. Not that I could do anything to stop it, but that was clear in 1995. The guy is a pseudo-techie pretending to be intellectual by citing a book. No, you're just a dead frog.
That's funny! You shouldn't have left your shit in a cave bro.
that's why their marketing department are selling it to you with animoji.
Yes, Apple's 1984 commercial has come full circle. The savior is now the enslaver.
Windows 10, Roomba, Google, Verizon and more all spy on you. Facial recognition is just one way and will soon be standard at all airports. Technology is great but it's creepy as fuck now.
Want to use Office 2016? You now need a microsoft account which they can suspend any time thus holding your purchased software hostage.
Want to turn off your wifi/bluetooth? It doesn't turn off! Android now needs Location services for some bluetooth to work? Google chrome generates a unique trackable ID (Well Windows 10 does so in a more evil manor), your O/S now has an advertising ID.
Every company wants a piece of you.
We have no privacy laws to protect us. Companies are anti-consumer, don't give a shit about you and just want what's good for them.
After all, if google cared they wouldn't to anti-consumer things like take away the ability to disable a single app instead now there's a stupid uninstall button.
so it's not just anti-consumer, it's lack of common sense and caring that they're slowly taking away user control all while committing data-theft thus raping you daily.
Who asked you?
I use my phone for banking, health tracking, Apple Pay and other activities that require it to be secure in case of theft or loss. Apple have developed a system that is superior to the fingerprint method currently used. The data used for facial recognition is, according to Apple, isolated to the device and not available on the cloud. Of course you may not trust Apple but that is your problem not mine. What fascinates me is how this is somehow creepy and immoral when Apple adds the technology but not so when other companies have introduced similar technology.
As for "privacy concerns" that horse bolted from the barn and was well into the next county the moment cameras became ubiquitous on cellphones. Anyone can take my photograph and post it to social media for the world to see. Many photo organising software packages now support facial recognition as a cataloging aid. For example, find all photos with grandma in them. In such a world it is trivial for someone to do a time-lapse of a street and pull out every photo that has a particular person in it.
No, it is not Apple or their implementation that is Orwellian and creepy, it is the world in general and we have to live with it.
Well said that man. Funny thing is, so many people on this site claim to be intelligent, but put trust in a corporate company lol. Apple, Microsoft, Google, Samsung etc... they are ALL the same. The walls don't need ears, people are buying the government eyes and ears and installing them on their own
One word: the guy writing this article is: ... wait for it... STUPID!
You can have absolute certainty that DARPA is probably already funding multiple projects for robots and cameras with advanced facial and object recognition cameras to be potentially deployed in several scenarios in the future.
Part of the reason I didn't finish a PhD is that I was researching low-power machine vision. Creepy shit when you think about it. Eventually I said to myself, "Someone is going to make this technology, but it doesn't have to be me." I switched to computer security (which was easy since embedded systems + security experts are in high demand), and I sleep much better. If I return to that PhD, I want to make anti-censorship and privacy-enhancing technology.
Please do not buy X and start sending a message to this company that double charges you for the same hardware found in other devices.
Have you looked at the component list of manufacturers?!
How can one call this an apple product at all?
Part chosen and assemble by Apple maybe?
1984 by Ghost of Steve?
Seriously when will the masses wake up?
End of Line.
So, you want product XYZ without "features" ABC...Apple offers you XYZ *with* ABC...It looks like Apple's not giving you the product you want. Company not giving you the product you want? DON'T BUY IT.
Can one switch this feature off in settings? It would be a shame to have to tape over part of the phone.
If the government can hack into your camera they don't need Apple's facial recognition software, they can use their own. The privacy/security risk of Face ID is that anyone can unlock your phone by pointing it at your face.
People posting pictures of themselves and information about their personal life on a public website
love is just extroverted narcissism
I have no way of knowing how secure or not secure Face ID is, so I'm not even going to venture a guess about that.
But, even if it is perfectly secure, are there really people who don't see that it's straight-up creepy?
...nothing? crickets...seriously it took 2 seconds to completely decimate your stupid argument.
Slashdot used deal with technology from a technical basis. Dealing with it from a literary basis it beyond a total fail, given that the editors are illiterate.
I am not a lawyer, but I have read that biometric data (fingerprints, facial recognition) is not protected by the US Constitution's 5th amendment rights against self-incrimination. Passwords and passcodes are protected, as long as you are the owner of the device or data. In other words, you cannot be legally compelled to provide a password to access your devices, data or accounts, but you can be legally compelled to provide a fingerprint or other biometric data. For this reason, I view the trend to biometric access control with suspicion.
> who doesn't place their finger on the back of their phone
Me. I hold it with my thumb on the power button on the right, my first three fingers around the left side of the frame, and my pinky curled up so its on the bottom holding it up. None of my fingers is near the location of the sensor found on other phones.
" I mean imagine how cool it would be to put your finger on the Apple logo on the back of your iPhone for Touch ID?"
For those of us not living in the past and using Apple products (welcome to wireless charging btw), we've already experimented with this (See Samsung S8) and it's awful.
Apple thought this through, just like it did with Touch ID. The biometric data for Touch ID and Face ID stay on the device in secure storage.
Once the public starts using Face ID, everyone will see how convenient it is--and how much more convenient it is than Touch ID.
If you want creepy, look into wifi and bluetooth beacons. Or the persistent storage on smartphones that maintains your identity in the various apps you've used, even if you delete and reinstall them and login with new credentials.
>> This means anyone within a several foot range of an iPhone X will get their face scanned by other people's phones
Moral of the story: don't frequent people who use Apple phones.
aaaaaaa
I almost never touch the back of my phone with my fingers. Why would a Touch ID sensor on the back be convenient? In fact, the location on Samsung phones is an oft-criticized "feature".
Don't like it? Then don't buy it! BTW, nobody took a more pro-privacy stance among tech companies than Tim Cook. You can write that off as advertising, but it's still true.
If we are simply looking for reasons to slam Apple, consider that Apple is 2nd to market with face scanning on a phone. Samsung had this first first! So when did you slam Samsung about this Orwellian feature? Oh yeah, you never did because it was Samsung. LOLZ The hypocrisy is deep!
Hmmmm, I loved reading Orwell, and was born in the Communist block during the late 70's not sure I would equate reality with Apple fandom.
It's a lot worse than "creepy".
It is CRIMINAL in my opinion, even TREASONOUS --as an accessory to violation of all of our CIVIL RIGHTS.
We need a real PROSECUTOR .....or ropes, rags and gasoline.
Dennis Morrisseau
US Army Officer [Vietnam era] ANTI-WAR
Lieutenant Morrisseau's Rebellion
FIRECONGRESS.org
Second Vermont Republic
POB 177, W. Pawlet, VT USA 05775
dmorso1@netzero.net
802 645 9727
It's a lot worse than "creepy".
It is CRIMINAL in my opinion, even TREASONOUS --as an accessory to violation of all of our CIVIL RIGHTS.
We need a real PROSECUTOR .....or ropes, rags and gasoline.
Dennis Morrisseau
US Army Officer [Vietnam era] ANTI-WAR
Lieutenant Morrisseau's Rebellion
FIRECONGRESS.org
Second Vermont Republic
POB 177, W. Pawlet, VT USA 05775
dmorso1@netzero.net
802 645 9727