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.
Just a month ago the encryption key for the Secure Enclave firmware on the iPhone 5S's was found.
While it doesn't mean someone can remote access the data from it, it does mean someone could load their own firmware on to an iPhone 5S's Secure Enclave. It also means the firmware can be analysed for vulnerabilities.
IT may be extremely difficult to get in to it, but I wouldn't go as far as saying its "literally impossible to reverse engineer, due to the high levels of iOS hardware security".
Sure, it's a high level of security, but nothing is perfect.
Actually, law enforcement can force you to use your fingerprint to unlock your phone. They just can't force you to use your passcode.
I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
People often don't know what they've been missing out on until you show it to them.
It's nothing new. For instance, face unlock was available on Alienware laptops 7+ years ago and has been common on Samsung devices for a while. The fact that Apple users "discover" that in September 2017 says a lot about this brand and their customer base.
lucm, indeed.
TL;DR
Laws in the U.S.A. are fucked-up.
#DeleteFacebook
To be fair, the summary does mention the concern of your privacy being violated by another person's phone. Now, you can then get into expectation of privacy in public places.
AFAICT if you have an iPhone 10 you're stuck with using your face to unlock your phone whether you like it or not.
This is just plan false.
People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
The iPhone 7/8 Touch ID sensor innately provides proximity/pressure sensitivity without need of moving parts. The sole value add function of the physical button is to provide tactile feedback to the user. By replacing the tactile feedback with haptic feedback using the vibration motor, Apple was able to eliminate all the moving parts from the home button, eliminating a significant source of repair claims on the entire device.
Just a month ago the encryption key for the Secure Enclave firmware on the iPhone 5S's was found. While it doesn't mean someone can remote access the data from it, it does mean someone could load their own firmware on to an iPhone 5S's Secure Enclave.
Hell no, lies and FUD. It just means someone has found the decryption key embedded in every copy of the Secure Enclave that Apple has used to obfuscate the code in transit. The updates are still signed, the signature check can't be disabled and the signing key only exists in Apple HQ, hackers can now begin to analyze the binary but there's no way for anyone else to alter it.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
In iOS 11, just click the power button 5 times - that temporarily disables both TouchID and FaceID, requiring a passcode to unlock the phone
#DeleteChrome
The watch word of the day is "normalization," isn't it? Apple including facial recognition technology helps normalize the idea and numb people to its use in a way thet Microsoft and Samsung apparently weren't because lack of hipster cred. But now that Apple has done it, it will go "mainstream" (i.e., people will realize it is where it was and think that's new. Also will want to add it other places).
There is only a bit of snark there. But frankly, yes, facial recognition technology is more invasive than fingerprint readers because i don't have to touch the phone. It is passive collection technology. And it isn't even necessarily the fact that Apple is using it for login (biometrics should replace user names, not passphrases) or that scan data is held in the SEP. it is that Apple has a chip in the phone that can do reasonably accurate scans at a good rate. Its probably only a matter of time before a Square-like device is made leveraging the ability to provide minority-report like indenrification of shoppers (and then they'll helpfully airplay ads and coupons to people!)
Like I said, some degree of snark there. But if any company can push pervasive biometric identification beyond "z0mg government spying!!" to "this is totally normal and acceptable. I don't remeber a world wherein my face wasn't scanned 300 times a day creating an irrefutable log of my movements and actions throughout the day! Isn't it a totally wonderful and acceptable social norm?!," well that would be Apple.