Slashdot Mirror
Hackers Say They've Broken Face ID a Week After iPhone X Release (wired.com)
Andy Greenberg, writing for Wired: When Apple released the iPhone X on November 3, it touched off an immediate race among hackers around the world to be the first to fool the company's futuristic new form of authentication. On Friday, Vietnamese security firm Bkav released a blog post and video showing that -- by all appearances -- they'd cracked Face ID with a composite mask of 3-D-printed plastic, silicone, makeup, and simple paper cutouts, which in combination tricked an iPhone X into unlocking. That demonstration, which has yet to be confirmed publicly by other security researchers, could poke a hole in the expensive security of the iPhone X, particularly given that the researchers say their mask cost just $150 to make. But it's also a hacking proof-of-concept that, for now, shouldn't alarm the average iPhone owner, given the time, effort, and access to someone's face required to recreate it. Bkav, meanwhile, didn't mince words in its blog post and FAQ on the research. "Apple has done this not so well," writes the company. "Face ID can be fooled by mask, which means it is not an effective security measure."
.... ain't all asian all look alike anyway?
If you remember, Touchid was similarly soon broken, and it also required quite some commitment from the hacker.
Still, for most people the security of TouchId was good enough and practical in use.
I expect the same with FaceID. For the utmost in security, users can always opt for a passcode.
So, what exactly is wrong with having to enter a passcode, anyway?
FaceID reminds me of this xkcd comic.
Except that you no longer need the wrench...
Fanatically anti-fanatical
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to somehow sedate the subject and create a life cast of their face without them figuring out that you're doing it. You must then jump though a bunch of other hoops in order to unlock the subject's phone. You are under no circumstances to use the subject's own face to unlock their phone. Should you or any of your IM force be caught or killed, you will be mocked mercilessly on Slashdot.
If you get arrested, they unlock the phone by holding it up to your face. That doesn't even require a mask. It's the opposite of security.
What happens when a person suffers an injury to their face? A serious black eye, swelling, etc? Do they get locked out of their phone at a time when that's probably the last thing they want to have to deal with?
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Exactly. Apple seems to have thought public information would make a better key than a secret, which is the opposite of security.
I guess if someone manages to make a mold of my face, I've got bigger problem than someone accessing the (wishful thinking) nudes on my phone.
The only scenario that matters here is a hacker getting sufficient information to construct this mold without the user knowing, and then lifting the phone by conventional means to break it. I don't think casual thieves are going to be able to pull this exploit off, which is adequate protection for a phone. Maybe I wouldn't use this (and only this) to guard nuclear launch codes.
We can use two photographs of your face as a stereoscopic image, then composite a 3D model.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Did it occur to you that all casual thieves would need to collect this data is another iPhone?
The researcher shows that the phone unlocks when presented with his face, but it doesn't show the enrollment or training phase.
For the sake of transparency, it would be nice to see that enrollment was done on his normal face without using any part of the mask or other shenanigans. And since the scanner apparently 'learns' from failed scans where you immediately enter the (correct) passcode, that's another route by which he could corrupt the enrolled data -- he could scan the mask and then enter his passcode enough times that it 'learns' the wrong thing.
If either of those are true, it only shows that the authorized user can enroll data that's close enough to both his real face and a mask that both unlock it.
fingerprint scanning increases the cost of the phone. Face recognition does not require any additional hardware.
Not true. There is both a structured light transmitter and receiver which are additional hardware compared to previous iphones. There may also be a separate processor for data processing of these modules.
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
I'm guessing it would be easier to use your real face than creating a model or trying to beat a pin number out of you. I'm not seeing how this is good security.
I'll take your wallet and your phone, now hold still while I use your face to unlock your phone.
you'll see that this required a far more detailed scan of the face than could be recovered from stereoscopy alone. They had to use FLIR to get an accurate enough scan.
There's a suitable camera in every iPhone X. Someone will figure out a hack to use that to scan someone else's face.
If it is no worse than a thumbprint, then why is it news? We've had fingerprint based unlocking for years--did you just now find out about it?.
Also, FaceID doesn't work if you're unconscious.
Also, if somebody is willing to beat you to death to get into your locked phone, then what form of security is going to stop that?
It seriously took 10 seconds to completely destroy your argument, maybe try harder next time.