Fingerprint sensors are so convenient that they have become must-have features on my phones. Removing it from the Pixel 4 is an unfortunate step backward in terms of everyday usability.
the iphone has no problems in the dark
Edit: looks like I'm probably wrong on this one
Facial Unlocking isn't just using image recognition. Face ID, specifically, using point mapping across a face, creating a 3D map of the face and reference points to unlock the device. I don't think a flat 2D image, even with IR photography, could trick a system like this.
A Hollywood grade prop mask of someone's face might be able to trick it, but that seems like a huge outlier.
A prop mask is one approach, but adversarial machine learning techniques might be even more effective, especially if you can study the adaption to a particular face.
This, I can do it without thinking.
I see what you did there. But that's not what OP said.
That remains to be seen. I've seen several implementations of face unlock that can be unlocked with a video playing on a phone.
Errr?
I just pick up my samsung phone and my finger naturally rests on the fingerprint sensor as I'm pulling it out, which instantly unlocks it in any conditions and the phone is ready to go by the time I'm looking at it.
Vs.
I have to tilt my iPhone up so it can see my face and make sure it's not blinded by the sun and then wait 500ms for it to think about whether I'm me or not.
Vs.
I get stopped at the border and they want warantless access to my iPhone. I say no. They just point it at me and unlock it.
Fingerprint ID is superior in every way.
I won't comment on the other statements as they're a matter of preference that I simply disagree with.
You can be forced to put your finger on the device to unlock it, but at least that has no plausible deniability. the most secure option is still a long PIN/passphrase, but that's too inconvenient.
To temporarily disable FaceID and TouchID, you "just press and hold the side button, and either one of the volume buttons".
Good luck remembering the procedure and having the time to do that in an emergency or mugging.
1. It’s much less reliable. Especially in bed when I get paged at night I almost always have to revert to PIN auth, which is unfortunate when I’m disoriented and seconds count.
2. It’s much slower. With the placement of fingerprint sensors on Pixel phones it is totally natural to have the phone unlocked and open by the time the screen comes into view. With FaceID I don’t even start that process until then, and it’s a several step process: assuming the screen is already on (this works well) I have to look at the phone, wait a moment... then swipe up to actually unlock the phone. Facial recognition aside, the act of swiping up alone is way more work than fingerprinting into a Pixel phone.
3. The thing I like most about FaceID is checking notifications - I can simply look at the screen and Signal messages unlock, etc.
I’m convinced that most of the hate iPhone users have for fingerprint unlock relates to the placement of the sensor, and (never having used an iPhone fingerprint reader this is speculation) maybe it’s speed or reliability. The implementation on Pixel phones was really great and I’ll be sad to see it go.
This is a tangent, but oncall roles where seconds count but you need to sleep during your shift are an idea as bad as it is ubiquitous.
Not sure, my fingerprint sensor in Pixel 3 is unreliable during cold season (in Poland it is about 7 months) - my fingers are dry then (a side affect of allergy) and I basically have to teach it my fingerprint every week because it stops recognizing it.
And when it does it takes too much time in my opinion, so I plan to buy Pixel 4 solely because of Face Unlock (but I hope my ever changing beard won't be an issue).
Pixel 3 is my first phone with fingerprint sensor and I was really looking forward to it, but after almost a year of having it I basically hate it.
1) Triggering the fingerprint sensor requires an active action, 'touch this sensor', versus Face ID (even with attention-detection enabled). This is important for law-enforcement. It is easier for law enforcement to get you to look at something that it is to compel you to unlock something.
See for instance https://www.wired.com/story/police-unlock-iphone-face-id-leg... Note that some courts have ruled that Face ID should have similar protections as Touch ID, but the issue is far from settled and is likely to end up in court in the future.
2) It's easier in mass-transit and POS scenarios to tap your phone while touching the fingerprint sensor. The flow for Face ID is much more convoluted -- bring the phone near the reader (which may be away from your face) to bring up the payment UI, then bring your phone to your face if the reader is faced away, double-click the home button...
3) During meetings, it's easy to sneak a glance at notifications (if your notifications are set to show only when authenticated) by touching your fingerprint sensor -- there's no need to bring your phone to your face and make it obvious you're checking your phone.
I don't mind Face ID, to be clear. But I always felt Touch ID was more unobtrusive.
It already does. Biometrics of any kind are not protected if the police have a warrant which is what happened in the story you linked.
It is not as black-and-white as you make it out to be (which was my point -- this will likely end up in the Supreme Court at some point). Specifically, some courts disagree with your position, and hold that even with a warrant, you have a fifth-amendment right not to incriminate yourself.
See for instance https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2019/01/14/feds-...
> But in a more significant part of the ruling, Judge Westmore declared that the government did not have the right, even with a warrant, to force suspects to incriminate themselves by unlocking their devices with their biological features.
The issue is, of course, in the meantime, it's far easier for law enforcement to execute a fait accompli and get a suspect to look at their phone to unlock it.
I'd miss it a lot, and it's one of the reasons I think I'll keep my 3XL for another year instead of upgrading to the Pixel 4.
On my Galaxy S9, I use both the face unlock and fingerprint reader all the time. I was just thinking this morning that face unlock is proving very useful in the autumn chill, as I can actually use my phone's touchscreen with thin gloves, but don't have to take them off to use the fingerprint reader.
Relying on the front camera to replace fingerprint readers is a compromise, and it makes the phone less valuable to me for a lot of every day use cases. I'm glad some other manufacturers make phones with fewer of those kinds compromises.
Even cops can use it to unlock your phone without permission legally[1], but they can't compel you to use your fingerprint on the device.
Of course if you really care about security you won't use either. Historically single factor biometric sensors have historically proven to be weak indicators of identity.
[1]: https://www.wired.com/story/police-unlock-iphone-face-id-leg...
Are you sure? Because I've read the completely opposite and that the only thing that the cops can't force you to do is enter your password.
In the real world typing your password a million times is a pain in the ass.
And, in either case, that doesn't really matter as Face ID/Touch ID can both be disabled by tapping the power button on every iPhone. In terms of security for that specific case, they're both equally secure. Face ID, however, has a much lower rate of false positives than Touch ID (with the notable exception being twins).
What makes you think that's what's going on here? You don't think Google did their own market and user research before making this thing?
Yes. I have even heard that they get market research on features after they had launched instead of early enough to use in decision-making. Google's product team is incompetent.