This article doesn't really answer the question it poses. Unless there is some huge security flaw that cannot be fixed, this marks the beginning of mainstream fingerprint recognition. Other companies will quickly follow suit. Yes, fingerprint technology has been around for a while, but it's always been either an optional accessory or used in a niche case where heightened security was required. Apple's use of fingerprint as ID is new and groundbreaking in this context.
There; I've said more of substance than the author said in his whole article.
It seems like Apple has been clear about the security of your fingerprint on your iPhone. Could the NSA be hacking your phone and retrieving this information? Nothing is impossible, but probably not if Apple has done what they describe.
A lot of the paranoia on Reddit and even HN seems misplaced to me. Federal and state governments already have large fingerprint databases. Most of you probably don't even remember when the police visited your grade school and taught the class about finger printing. Guess that they were collecting. So it's possible but unlikely that the federal government will collect your fingerprint data. However, we KNOW that the federal government is widely collecting communication metadata. This information is a much greater threat to freedom than your fingerprint. Both datasets are identifying, but one reveals a lot of additional information - about your lifestyle, habits, politics, speech, ideas, etc. The fingerprint conveys none of these.
The government has lots of ways to identify you if they want to. Most of these methods of identification are MUCH easier to implement than fingerprints (communication metadata and patterns, face recognition, license plate tracking, etc.). In the end, making a cell phone call is more convenient but less secure than other types of communication, but we accept this trade-off. The trade-off for using a fingerprint to facilitate dozens of daily interactions with your phone seems possibly more favorable in terms of privacy.
I feel like the mention of the NSA and PRISM in this article is so tangential to the issue as to be misplaced. Why mention the NSA here when there's no evidence or reason to suppose that they'd want to mass-collect our fingerprint data specifically? I mean, I suppose anything that is sent over the internet might be intercepted and stored/analyzed by the government but it's getting to the point where NSA and PRISM are just popular buzz words adopted by anyone and everyone trying to make a name for themselves in the tech community ("check out my app that pokes fun at the NSA and PRISM issue", "5 reasons I will be protecting my data from NSA/PRISM").
I'm not saying there's no threat to privacy here just that there are a lot of reasons other than the NSA and PRISM that make data privacy important and that we should be focused on the larger issues.
This article appears to contain very little substance, and basically just asks the question, asserts that "nothing is safe in the digital world", and provides no evidence or argumentation.
Don't get me wrong, I think fingerprint scanners are probably broken until proven otherwise, but this article does nothing to enlighten anyone...
[+] [-] probablyfiction|12 years ago|reply
There; I've said more of substance than the author said in his whole article.
[+] [-] daughart|12 years ago|reply
A lot of the paranoia on Reddit and even HN seems misplaced to me. Federal and state governments already have large fingerprint databases. Most of you probably don't even remember when the police visited your grade school and taught the class about finger printing. Guess that they were collecting. So it's possible but unlikely that the federal government will collect your fingerprint data. However, we KNOW that the federal government is widely collecting communication metadata. This information is a much greater threat to freedom than your fingerprint. Both datasets are identifying, but one reveals a lot of additional information - about your lifestyle, habits, politics, speech, ideas, etc. The fingerprint conveys none of these.
The government has lots of ways to identify you if they want to. Most of these methods of identification are MUCH easier to implement than fingerprints (communication metadata and patterns, face recognition, license plate tracking, etc.). In the end, making a cell phone call is more convenient but less secure than other types of communication, but we accept this trade-off. The trade-off for using a fingerprint to facilitate dozens of daily interactions with your phone seems possibly more favorable in terms of privacy.
[+] [-] itsmequinn|12 years ago|reply
I'm not saying there's no threat to privacy here just that there are a lot of reasons other than the NSA and PRISM that make data privacy important and that we should be focused on the larger issues.
[+] [-] lvh|12 years ago|reply
Don't get me wrong, I think fingerprint scanners are probably broken until proven otherwise, but this article does nothing to enlighten anyone...
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] twiceaday|12 years ago|reply