Slashdot Mirror
Apple Recommends Children Under 13, Twins and Siblings Do Not Use Face ID On iPhone X (theguardian.com)
According to a security guide published Wednesday, Apple recommends that children under the age of 13 do not use Face ID on the iPhone X due to the probability of a false match being significantly higher for young children. The company said this was because "their distinct facial features may not have fully developed." They also recommend that twins and siblings do not use the new feature. The Guardian reports: In all those situations, the company recommends concerned users disable Face ID and use a passcode instead. With Face ID, Apple has implemented a secondary system that exclusively looks out for attempts to fool the technology. Both the authentication and spoofing defense are based on machine learning, but while the former is trained to identify individuals from their faces, the latter is used to look for telltale signs of cheating. "An additional neural network that's trained to spot and resist spoofing defends against attempts to unlock your phone with photos or masks," the company says. If a completely perfect mask is made, which fools the identification neural network, the defensive system will still notice -- just like a human.
Do they really need to specify both twins and siblings?
Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
Like most people on Earth?
Buy the 8, SE, 7 or 6S (or Droid) and vote with your wallet against this half arsed system AND save a bundle in the process.
Steve Jobs was a huge fan of touch ID. You could say he was the driving force behind it, basically spearheaded its development and pushed the technology to where it is today. He would not be a fan of face recognition. Too many compromises, too many security holes. He never would have stood for it.
RIP Steve. May Apple see the error of their ways.
Apple will brick your iPhone and erase all data.
The wonderful trend of feature-removal in the modern computing and electronics world. Take a feature like using a fingerprint, and then instead of ADDING facial recognition, REPLACE the fingerprint technology, which worked pretty darn well, with something that doesn't work properly for massive portions of the population. We have sheephumping morons running, and ruining, everything...
The phone's neural network gets confused by the gender changes.
Before going it the NSA database.
I remember seeing those Snapchat face filters and being like "Here comes the Man." But in this instance, I really don't see how the privacy thing enters into it. The Secure Enclave on iOS is the real deal down at the hardware level in these phones; I don't see anyone (well, I haven't looked to hard either) thinking the government(s?) are making a vast fingerprint DB with Touch ID profiles...and Face ID is same technology just with a different input.
to a child under 13 ? The chances of it being lost or stolen are quite high!
Its because they are pushing the data somewhere. Those under 13 fall under the Child online protection Act so apple wants none of that.
It's all bullshit. Whatshisfuck stood on stage and claimed that it was orders of magnitude more secure and reliable than TouchID. What happened?
If a completely perfect mask is made, which fools the identification neural network, the defensive system will still notice -- just like a human.
Nope. If a "perfect" mask is made, the defensive system won't notice. And neither will a human. And if a "good" mask is made, the defensive system won't notice, but a human will.
Your system isn't usable for children under 13 because "their distinct facial features may not have fully developed"? Bullshit. It isn't usable because it doesn't work well. 12 year olds have faces as distinct as any other human face, far more distinct than a fingerprint, etc. You are using a high res 3D ("depth sensing") camera, thousands of points of detection, etc., etc., right?
If you can't distinguish 2 faces your shit is broken.
If you can't recognize 1 face as being the same your shit is broken.
If you can't walk the line between false positives and false negatives, you lie and dream up some shit about a defensive mechanism that's always working even when Face ID isn't working right, or Face ID not working because your faces haven't aged to distinction yet.
Bullllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllshiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit!
A "completely perfect" mask would fool a human pretty much by definition, but it wouldn't fool Face ID, because.... magic!
"Having a twin", "having at least one sibling", or "being under the age of 13", is just one of those unforeseeable contingencies Apple has had to contend with. It joins the likes of "being left handed", "the comic strip Dick Tracy being prior art to everything about the Apple Watch", and "heterosexuality".
Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUH!
Biometrics change. This is not new information. They especially change in children and can continue through age 25 and later, and through accident and design. Stop using them. Use a code, and use something more than 4 digits long (or 6, its only 10^6 units of entropy minus all those eliminated by seeing your grubby-ass fingerprints on your screen cause none of you filthy heathens actually wipe them clean but maybe once a day.)
also...
"An additional neural network that's trained to spot and resist spoofing defends against attempts to unlock your phone with photos or masks," the company says. If a completely perfect mask is made, which fools the identification neural network, the defensive system will still notice -- just like a human
Will it false-trigger if I have a flu? Sinus problems? Allergies? What about if I am blushing? Change my facial hair? Change my makeup? Have a black eye? Have half my face covered in bandages cause I got beat up by Apple fanboys when I was too drunk to defend myself?
If it can be changed without your consent, or even understanding, its not fit to function as a security token. Stop using biometrics, they are not static. Government data invasions aside, they are not a reliable key.
Apple did specify "siblings that look like you",
Yes, but what they mean is siblings that look like you according to an algorithm which also thinks that all kids under 13 look alike. This doesn't exactly inspire much confidence especially if this is the algorithm protecting your Apple Pay cards on your phone. Mind you at the price they are charging you probably won't have much money left on those cards for your look alike to access.
We're doing something we think is cool, fuck whomever it doesn't work for.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
If Apple didn't counter-indicate FaceID for children, they would probably be violating COPA - the act that makes it so companies cannot start fucking around with your data til you are 13. Well, at least, not as freely.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
Everyone else recommends nobody use crappy gimmicks like Face ID.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
I am blessed with young twin babies, they are not identical - boy and girl, so they should be different enough for the system. But in general even if they were identical, I would expect that most twins aren't split between good and evil, meaning in practice it wouldn t be an issue for each of them to use faceid on their own phone. It is a matter of trust if you mind that your twin cannot unlock your phone.
Similarly my wife and I use touchid and we also know the passcode of each other's phone, sometimes it is usful to be able to unlock the other phone.
I would recommend no one should use Face ID, or the IphoneX for that matter.
The NSA thanks you for the updated face scans.
Have you ever fallen asleep at the keybhanusdiog?
"If a completely perfect mask is made, which fools the identification neural network, the defensive system will still notice -- just like a human". If the mask or photo is "completely perfect" then how will it tell? If it can tell, then by definition the mask is not perfect.
I strongly suspect that the "not for kids under 13" is mainly to head off legal issues due to the US rules that kids under 13 need explicit parental permission to enroll in services that affect their privacy.
That's also the reason why facebook and many other internet companies' terms and conditions all require you to be at least 13 to sign up as well, they simply don't want to have to deal with the hassle of verifying/validating and keeping records that an actual adult explicitly authorized their kid signing up. If a kid ignores the EULA signs up anyway, then they 'lied' during the signup and facebook can't be held responsible for letting them in.
I went to a trade fair, for IT in schools.
Against my wishes, I was asked to research biometric logins.
Pretty much every single stall that offered anything even remotely like that told me one thing (usually after much probing, or literally having to ask outright if it would work).
They don't work reliably enough for kids. Fingerprints. Iris scans. Face recognition. Every vendor told me the same thing, but they weren't actually ADVERTISING that (obviously). They said they would be good enough for, say, a library where people can just type in a name when it failed but for anything that needed a vague semblance of success, the kid would have to be at last 9/10/11.
As far as I was concerned, this was a welcome relief as I could honestly say that every vendor had said their products wouldn't be suitable for the product research I was asked to do. But it did make me wonder why they were there, still.
Apparently until they're "grown up", about 15/16, the chances of having to constantly re-register them are high and they had an awful lot of product returns etc. where people were using them with younger users.
In a way, a great thing. But I was also surprised that the tech was just that fragile.
Obviously Apple are lying about Face ID's 1 in 1,000,000.
...Face ID sucks!
Know what would be nice? A face recognition app that tells me the name of the person I'm talking to. I have a little bit of trouble with faces, even when it comes to close friends, so it would be nice if I had some Augmented Reality overlay to tell me who they are when I haven't seen them for a while. Luckily, so far other people recognise me readily enough so that compensates for my deficiency.
Now... if this app I'm suggesting could also tell identical twins apart... that would be awesome.
"Everybody's naked underneath" -- The Doctor
The probability that a random person in the population could look at your iPhone X and unlock it using Face ID is approximately 1 in 1,000,000 (versus 1 in 50,000 for Touch ID)... The probability of a false match is different for twins and siblings that look like you as well as among children under the age of 13, because their distinct facial features may not have fully developed. If you're concerned about this, we recommend using a passcode to authenticate.
Until we have some third party testing on how easy it is to fool Face ID, I'm reserving judgment.
Apple confirms what I have thought for years. All kids look alike.
It doesn't work.
Biometrics are fairly distinct sets of data, however THEY ARE NOT SECRETS.
Also, your fingers / your face has value to you, as something other than an authentication device.
This may not be the case with someone interested as authenticating as you.
For some psychopaths, stealing a finger in addition to a phone is just not that big a deal.
For some psychopaths, stealing a head in addition to a phone is just not that big a deal.
Don't use biometrics for authentication; just don't.
Is this the part where they tell you you're facing wrong?
What about sheep ?
You can't make a safe distinction between sheep's faces.
So why did Apple implement this face recognition is beyond me.
aaaaaaa