Hacker News Reader

Comment by cwilson | Hacker News Reader

Interesting quote: "It's never available to other software. It's never uploaded to Apple's servers or backed up to iCloud."

I was momentarily worried the NSA fingerprint database was going to get a whole lot bigger, but I guess not.

Edit: Obviously this could totally backfire and Apple could screw us all, just reporting what was said.

Edit 2: Video is up detailing all of this a bit more: http://www.apple.com/iphone-5s/videos/#video-touch

View on HN

Right, because it's not as if tech companies have given us any reasons to doubt their claims in the past few months.

Definitely, and, on the other hand, if that's true there will only be a client side verification, which will be defeated by a jailbreak sooner or later. When it happens anyone who steals your phone will have an easy way to your money as well I guess.

There is zero chance that client side verification is the only thing that will be used to authenticate purchases. Presumably the fingerprint is used to unlock your saved iTunes/iCloud password, which is then sent to Apple's servers and verified as usual. If your phone is stolen, change your password and they'll be locked out, fingerprint or no.

I agree, my point anyway was that the problem remains even if everything works as you described, up until you notice that the phone is missing and find a way to get online and change the password of your own itunes account

Unless there is a "bug" in software that accidentally uploads all the data to secure servers under certain conditions, that for "some reason" was left over from debugging stage of the product. Unless we see source code and actual A7 + Motion chimp design blueprints that they use at the factory, I will always be skeptical. All that said I will be getting 5S anyways, because device looks rock solid.

I for one am totally satisfied by what a suit says on stage.

California requires a thumb print to get a drivers license, so I'm already in the government database :(

Yes this. Most of us have fingerprints in databases.

Perhaps there is hypothetical risk of a digitized fingerprint leaking out and being planted to frame a crime, but I don't see how this fingerprint feature is really a true concern.

Alternatively you could use this to help prove you were at a location

Most? Really?

I've never had to submit my fingerprints except to apply for concealed carry licenses, which is an interaction with the police-judicial complex, just one to show you're not of interest to them. I suppose enlightened California's driver's licenses is somewhat in that direction, but in other states I wonder if it's so routine.

Perhaps not most, Looking online FBI says it has 70 million known criminal prints and 34 million civil prints.

There's also this which is funny,

"How do you know if you're in the FBI database? According to Department of Justice rules, you have the right to submit your own fingerprints for a background check on yourself. (This allows you to contest anything that might be on your rap sheet.) Just write out a formal request and send it to the FBI, along with a full set of fingerprints and a money order for $18."

Ha. It would be easier if they could go by your name or SSN.

Normal fingerprint cards are pretty hard to procure without the person supplying them noticing, whereas allowing generally known metadata would make privacy violations much easier as well as allow a variety of errors.

This is a marketing nightmare in the making... it's only a matter of time before the phone is jailbroken and the biometric data made accessible.

Apparently the fingerprint data can only be accessed by the touch sensor through it's own hardware subsystem. The data is not stored on the main flash memory, and there's no way to access it from software running on the main processor. They explained it briefly in the keynote presentation.

Indeed. Obviously this was in the works before Snowden et. al., but now it could catastrophically backfire.

I think some elaboration is in order. Given that it's a feature and you can still use those good old 4-digit codes, I don't see why it could backfire and turn into a marketing nightmare.

Ah, you're constraining bad outcomes by rationality. Things frequently don't work that way; maybe even generally don't work that way.

Whose data, jailbroken phone owners'? I'm not following you.

They could just remotely access your phone, through specially engineered apps or potential back-doors, or download it during a routine security search. Depending on how accurate the sensor is, how much of the finger is captures, and how the software stores and compares the data, they could potentially get every person who has used your phone's home button. It would be similar to remotely turning on laptop webcams. (I think i'm starting to make myself paranoid.)

All the cutlery in my kitchen has my fingerprints on it too.

Your cutlery doesn't have fingerprint digitizers and a wifi connection.

I'm generally of the opinion that we can't trust any information on our devices to actually remain secret now.

Generally you would be a fool to anyway. Chances are that anybody can make their own fake finger with gummy bears and a print found on the glossy case. Same has always been true though, through bootrom exploits and simple shoulder surfing.

Did you know your passcode can be more than 4 digits? Most people don't.

If millions of people in the country regularly connected their knives to the internet this might be a similar concern.

Now, that doesn't say it's never uploaded to other servers than those of Apple's.

Cynicism at its new level but who can I really blame.

Every time you enter the USA they get your fingerprints! And plenty of them...

They even scanned me on the way out once.

They have what they need already.

I wonder if it would be possible for the phone to just store a hashed representation of a fingerprint (ie. enough information to recognize the print, but not enough to reproduce it) rather than the whole fingerprint.

From what they've said, sounds like they're storing the fingerprint on the phone, which means that someone determined enough could retrieve it, whatever Apple's intentions are.

I'm pretty sure that the information for a fingerprint scanner is already effectively a hash. It's a list of points that can be used to uniquely (more or less) identify the fingerprint. I doubt it's storing a photo.

But even then, what's the difference? If the hash is enough to identify you that's the important thing.

Salt the hash. Then it only has meaning to the phone.

Someone with just a hash can't impersonate you.

No, but they can identify you. The danger in the mass collection of biometric data is tracking. People who want to place prints or physically break into your phone are probably also present enough in your life to do it other ways.

Yeah, I was thinking about impersonating rather than identifying. Good point.

> Interesting quote: "It's never available to other software. It's never uploaded to Apple's servers or backed up to iCloud."

I don't know if I'd believe this - there's always the option of a remote firmware upgrade. This sensor gives me a bad feeling. (Similarly to letting my DNA analyze by 23andme & co.)

Instead of debating your legal right to keep your password secret... now someone can grab your hand and force your finger onto the home button!

Or keep you in custody at the border until you reveal your password.

Why are you worried? Did you commit a crime recently or have an intention of doing so?

Digitized fingerprints are being stored in the chips of electronic passports of many EU countries. Every person applying for a visa to the US (to the best of my knowledge) is required to have their fingers scanned. If this means that the borders, for example, are better protected — sure, they can have my fingerprints.

Even if Apple will collect and submit all fingerprints of all iPhone users to the relevant authorities, this can only be good, not evil.

This is the 'nothing to hide' argument, and it's flawed. What if you're falsely accused of a crime? There are many ways for such a system to be abused.

What about a right to privacy? Taking fingerprints for a driver license or passport is one thing, connecting a fingerprint scanner to a device that tracks location and internet activity is entirely another.

Apple and your mobile provider already know who you are, because you told them when you created your iTunes account and mobile phone account.

> Did you commit a crime recently or have an intention of doing so?

Is this the new "Have you anything to hide"?

How much kool-aid have you been drinking?!

"Relevant Authorities". Since when is Apple, or the NSA relevant authorities for rummaging through your private data? Also, I like to follow the principle of least privilege. It is best policy not to allow your private data to be hanging out for any one to (ab)use. I am not a criminal, so why should they have my information?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com