Trivial will be running a crack on the limited number of hashes that can be generated by the phone's sampler for fingerprint images.
The problem with this is not where it has started, as a simple PIN replacement for iPhones. It is where this is headed, now that Apple has used their marketing position to deliver Biometric authentication as a security technology in the mainstream.
People who are good at technology problem-solving are often equipped with exactly wrong type of mental orientation for examining implication or cross-disciplinary context. So? You get a reasonable PIN replacement for your iPhone, that reduces auto-collisions by people unlocking their phones while driving. Nice.
You also get this as a cure-all for the password problem, as an option on every device you interact with, over the next 4 years. I don't care if it is thumbprint, retina-scan or gut-biome that is measured. This will lower security and introduce as-yet-unforseen compromises.
I'd paint the lens on this thing, with black enamel.
sounds really trivial to break. I can see all kinds of kids doing this.
Known vector. Gummy-bear attack.
The core issue is that you leave copies of your authenticator EVERYWHERE. It's as if you dropped 85% accurate copies of your smartcard on every item you touched - with random 15% damage to the material - and a card reader designed for 15% error in reads.
Any such scheme is going to be subject to this kind of impersonation or gaming. This is why biometrics are always a bad ID choice. Also, the A/D conversion is low-entropy, among other problems.
There's a false assumption, that because I can uniquely identify another person with 99.999% accuracy, based on your sound, shape and appearance, that therefore this is the best way a machine should do so. It is a falsehood that is reinforced by a misleading intuitive perception. The core issue concerns the questions related to what constitutes "identity" and an "authentication factor" in systems. Neither of these correlate to actual persons or their real-world characteristics in a unique and meaningful way, that is not also subject to spoofing, injecting or revocation DoS.
1- Manage MILESTONES, not MINUTES 2- Quality problems are why there is a design spec and QA engineering. If these are too "old school" for your management and methodology, expect the beating to continue. That means code coverage and quality will be measured by your customers.;-)
Hey kids! Why are you messing with those science-projects from the Bell Labs gang? C'mon! RSTS is the established and serious way to compute. We think you'll find that our shareholders appreciate the value provided by our additional cost.
...While there is a vast and increasing amount of evidence for role in Earth's changing climate,... Your argument against climate change basically appears to be "it's too complex to know"
Climatology is another quasi-science, like Economics. They are both intrinsically linked.
It got you across the Siberian Bering land bridge, 12,000 years ago, in the close of the Pleistocene Epoch.
Of course, you can always play "Sorcerer's Apprentice" with the climate. I'm sure that will work out as well as, say, efforts to fertilize the plains around the Aral sea...
Chasing Ice is a well-intentioned anecdotal document, used by the multi-national, macroeconomic boondoggle of "Climate Science", to emotionally sell their agenda.
The sad thing is, all the energy that could be directed at real justice and compassion: ending wars, feeding people, raising real living standards... End fuel and chemical pollution of vital aquatic ecosystems... Block the poisoning of 1/10th of the planet by leaking radioactivity... This energy is channeled away from doing real good, where people are instead misdirected to "save the earth" from the dodgy prospect of the sky falling.
This is by design. Channel the real good intentions and activist spirit of people high up the Maslow scale, direct it into an area that can tap into survival threat, and point this at a marginal problem over which they are largely powerless, instead of a civic and political effort to actually challenge the structure of elite power and dominance.
As your response shows, they have been able to tap into basic human fear. You are afraid for your OWN ARSE, not the well being of the planet or other people. If you gave half as much concern to general well being as your post suggests, you'd be down at the fucking rescue mission - handing out blankets to kids that live in freeway under passes, 'cause Lehman bros took down their Daddy's job with their market gambling .
There's also a narcissistic appeal to this AGW nonsense. Subscribers to this doctrine - and it IS a doctrine - congratulate themselves on their intelligence. Challenging the doctrine means challenging the self-image of those adherents, who take it as a personal injury - feeling their vaunted intelligence is being degraded, and that they are accused of being fools. In that way? The adherence to climate-doctrine is exactly like popular religion.
You lost me right there. While there is a vast and increasing amount of evidence for role in Earth's changing climate, there isn't any evidence at all for this "God" character you're referring to.
"My dear God in heaven" is an explanation of surprised indignance - used by me here with a deliberate irony - and not an opening declaration of:
C'mon. I'm talking about general perception, real or not, of "latter day, saintly self-sacrificing types" - and sarcastically.
My point is that someone stands to make a bundle, for decades - by setting the agenda for grade-school indoctrination. They don't go to court for the right to give away free books and DVDs to the whole country out of altruism.
There are numerous, more imminent calamities, killing the population globally - right now. But there aren't organizations being funded to solve these crises and provide you with facts about them in primary education. Solving them doesn't make these people rich.
The AGW boondoggle is another neo-liberal "shape the world" agenda, this time focused on taxing the air you breathe, instead of reshaping the sovereignty of resistant nations.
Climate change has been occurring since the Earth, ejected as a lump of molten iron form the heart of the Sun, settled into orbit and began slowly cooling...
You want to stop hypothesized, anthropogenic contribution? Downsize the US navy to coastal defense. You will remove enough human-released C02 from being projected into the atmosphere, to prevent imposing tax-based austerities on the captive population. This will also block the creation of a speculative secondary derivative market for carbon credits - which is the real motivator behind this farce. Getting more of your limited financial resource into the pockets of the - already - super-rich.
"You can fool all the people all of the time if the advertising is right and the budget is big enough." -- Joseph E. Levine
So you declare the film, and Gore's powerpoint, "largely accurate" through the single citation of single "Expert Witness" - Dr Philip Stott - in a court case? Stott gave evidence, for the distribution of a film, in which he appears.
"The producers would like to assure you the public, that no actual research funding was hurt in the making of this film."
In "Inconvenient Truth" Gore told lies - provably false - about "hockeysticks" and polar bears. Manipulation. The only "six metre rise" factually indicated, was the level of bullshit - and the rise of my gorge, at such. Oh. And Kilimanjaro isn't thawing. Lake Chad is safe. Katrina was a disaster made by hubris and broken infrastructure - not human impact to a weather event.
Who funded the effort? Who was going to underwrite the proposed 50,000 copies distributed to schools? Mother Teresa or the Dalai Lama?;-)
Slashdot Mirror
You act like it's so easy to just lift the fingerprints. Come on, they'd have to break into my parent's basement first.
Yes! And lift them from your +5 Vorpal Blade!
Trivial will be running a crack on the limited number of hashes that can be generated by the phone's sampler for fingerprint images.
The problem with this is not where it has started, as a simple PIN replacement for iPhones. It is where this is headed, now that Apple has used their marketing position to deliver Biometric authentication as a security technology in the mainstream.
People who are good at technology problem-solving are often equipped with exactly wrong type of mental orientation for examining implication or cross-disciplinary context. So? You get a reasonable PIN replacement for your iPhone, that reduces auto-collisions by people unlocking their phones while driving. Nice.
You also get this as a cure-all for the password problem, as an option on every device you interact with, over the next 4 years. I don't care if it is thumbprint, retina-scan or gut-biome that is measured. This will lower security and introduce as-yet-unforseen compromises.
I'd paint the lens on this thing, with black enamel.
sounds really trivial to break. I can see all kinds of kids doing this.
Known vector. Gummy-bear attack.
The core issue is that you leave copies of your authenticator EVERYWHERE. It's as if you dropped 85% accurate copies of your smartcard on every item you touched - with random 15% damage to the material - and a card reader designed for 15% error in reads.
Any such scheme is going to be subject to this kind of impersonation or gaming. This is why biometrics are always a bad ID choice. Also, the A/D conversion is low-entropy, among other problems.
There's a false assumption, that because I can uniquely identify another person with 99.999% accuracy, based on your sound, shape and appearance, that therefore this is the best way a machine should do so. It is a falsehood that is reinforced by a misleading intuitive perception. The core issue concerns the questions related to what constitutes "identity" and an "authentication factor" in systems. Neither of these correlate to actual persons or their real-world characteristics in a unique and meaningful way, that is not also subject to spoofing, injecting or revocation DoS.
Whooosh!
I MISS having Lake Carolina. Sorry, Raleigh. Your coupla' good BBQ joints just ain't 'nuff to make up for the slow death, that is RTP.
BlackBerry can do this? Will presidential power continue to expand, so unchecked?
I don't think that's what George Washington intended, when he wrote the Constitution.
1- Manage MILESTONES, not MINUTES ;-)
2- Quality problems are why there is a design spec and QA engineering. If these are too "old school" for your management and methodology, expect the beating to continue. That means code coverage and quality will be measured by your customers.
Hey kids! Why are you messing with those science-projects from the Bell Labs gang? C'mon! RSTS is the established and serious way to compute. We think you'll find that our shareholders appreciate the value provided by our additional cost.
WHAT WOULD HAPPEN?
What? Say your Plutonium-Powered Satellite rides up on a booster, that does the same thing as "Challenger".
How far does the atomised Plutonium disperse?
I for one, really don't like the odds.
Fuck NASA. Collateral damage.
It it's theirs? It's a target. Hayden started this shit - now he deals with the consequences.
Don't you kids read Asimov, anymore? The message is simple:
Robots are for fucking, not for fighting!
Why not just sign up to a UFO Death Cult like Heaven's Gate?
Have fun storming the castle!
He WROTE AN OPERATING SYSTEM!?
I thought it was pretty AWESOME when it was just those AMBER BOOKS!
1 US Navy destroyer consumes the amount of fuel-oil in a day, to heat the average US home for 100-150 years.
This used to be a factiod that they would dispense as public information, on ship tours - even into the mid-1970's.
So? You merely argue for their cost effectiveness.
...While there is a vast and increasing amount of evidence for role in Earth's changing climate, ... Your argument against climate change basically appears to be "it's too complex to know"
Climatology is another quasi-science, like Economics. They are both intrinsically linked.
Changing climate?
It got you across the Siberian Bering land bridge, 12,000 years ago, in the close of the Pleistocene Epoch.
Of course, you can always play "Sorcerer's Apprentice" with the climate. I'm sure that will work out as well as, say, efforts to fertilize the plains around the Aral sea...
Whoa, dude. Did I step on your tits?
Chasing Ice is a well-intentioned anecdotal document, used by the multi-national, macroeconomic boondoggle of "Climate Science", to emotionally sell their agenda.
The sad thing is, all the energy that could be directed at real justice and compassion: ending wars, feeding people, raising real living standards... End fuel and chemical pollution of vital aquatic ecosystems... Block the poisoning of 1/10th of the planet by leaking radioactivity... This energy is channeled away from doing real good, where people are instead misdirected to "save the earth" from the dodgy prospect of the sky falling.
This is by design. Channel the real good intentions and activist spirit of people high up the Maslow scale, direct it into an area that can tap into survival threat, and point this at a marginal problem over which they are largely powerless, instead of a civic and political effort to actually challenge the structure of elite power and dominance.
As your response shows, they have been able to tap into basic human fear. You are afraid for your OWN ARSE, not the well being of the planet or other people. If you gave half as much concern to general well being as your post suggests, you'd be down at the fucking rescue mission - handing out blankets to kids that live in freeway under passes, 'cause Lehman bros took down their Daddy's job with their market gambling .
There's also a narcissistic appeal to this AGW nonsense. Subscribers to this doctrine - and it IS a doctrine - congratulate themselves on their intelligence. Challenging the doctrine means challenging the self-image of those adherents, who take it as a personal injury - feeling their vaunted intelligence is being degraded, and that they are accused of being fools. In that way? The adherence to climate-doctrine is exactly like popular religion.
My dear God in heaven!
You lost me right there. While there is a vast and increasing amount of evidence for role in Earth's changing climate, there isn't any evidence at all for this "God" character you're referring to.
"My dear God in heaven" is an explanation of surprised indignance - used by me here with a deliberate irony - and not an opening declaration of:
The MOTD banner, at the footer of the Slashdot pages.
That's Mister "+5 Insightful full-of-shit Sir" to you.
Now, back to your cogent argument, and evidence-ridden point of view?
C'mon. I'm talking about general perception, real or not, of "latter day, saintly self-sacrificing types" - and sarcastically.
My point is that someone stands to make a bundle, for decades - by setting the agenda for grade-school indoctrination. They don't go to court for the right to give away free books and DVDs to the whole country out of altruism.
There are numerous, more imminent calamities, killing the population globally - right now. But there aren't organizations being funded to solve these crises and provide you with facts about them in primary education. Solving them doesn't make these people rich.
The AGW boondoggle is another neo-liberal "shape the world" agenda, this time focused on taxing the air you breathe, instead of reshaping the sovereignty of resistant nations.
Climate change has been occurring since the Earth, ejected as a lump of molten iron form the heart of the Sun, settled into orbit and began slowly cooling...
You want to stop hypothesized, anthropogenic contribution? Downsize the US navy to coastal defense. You will remove enough human-released C02 from being projected into the atmosphere, to prevent imposing tax-based austerities on the captive population. This will also block the creation of a speculative secondary derivative market for carbon credits - which is the real motivator behind this farce. Getting more of your limited financial resource into the pockets of the - already - super-rich.
QOTD on Slashfooter, at time you responded:
"You can fool all the people all of the time if the advertising is right and the budget is big enough."
-- Joseph E. Levine
So you declare the film, and Gore's powerpoint, "largely accurate" through the single citation of single "Expert Witness" - Dr Philip Stott - in a court case?
Stott gave evidence, for the distribution of a film, in which he appears.
"The producers would like to assure you the public, that no actual research funding was hurt in the making of this film."
In "Inconvenient Truth" Gore told lies - provably false - about "hockeysticks" and polar bears. Manipulation. The only "six metre rise" factually indicated, was the level of bullshit - and the rise of my gorge, at such. Oh. And Kilimanjaro isn't thawing. Lake Chad is safe. Katrina was a disaster made by hubris and broken infrastructure - not human impact to a weather event.
Who funded the effort? Who was going to underwrite the proposed 50,000 copies distributed to schools? Mother Teresa or the Dalai Lama? ;-)