4
4
0
Has the time come for widespread biometric identification? I unlock my cell phone with my thumb print. ApplePay is a step in that direction.
I suspect that it would cut down on Identity theft, illegal immigration, and voter fraud.
It would make it easier to track down criminals... but also keep tabs on citizens.
I gave my fingerprints when I got my CHL, it didn't bother me because I figured they were on file from when I joined the Army anyway.
My daughter had to submit fingerprints when she got her Texas drivers license and I cringed a bit (that has since been struck down).
"Those that will sacrifice liberty for security shall have neither."
I'm divided on the thought, I think it's coming though... and I'm very interested in what the community thinks.
I suspect that it would cut down on Identity theft, illegal immigration, and voter fraud.
It would make it easier to track down criminals... but also keep tabs on citizens.
I gave my fingerprints when I got my CHL, it didn't bother me because I figured they were on file from when I joined the Army anyway.
My daughter had to submit fingerprints when she got her Texas drivers license and I cringed a bit (that has since been struck down).
"Those that will sacrifice liberty for security shall have neither."
I'm divided on the thought, I think it's coming though... and I'm very interested in what the community thinks.
Posted in these groups: 
Technology
Technology
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 3
3
3
0
Misuse would give opportunity to an entirely new meaning to the words "identity theft"...
(3)
(0)
MSgt Curtis Ellis
The issue could come where the "fingerprint" or what have you, is transformed into a code that the computer can read PRIOR to the computer reading it... If someone created something that could intercept and copy that "code" they wouldn't need your fingerprint or retinal scan... All they would need is the code and the ability to access the system from the back end just before the computer read it... About 40 years ago I would have said, "No freakin way!" Now? Hell, anything is possible when we're dealing with computers and electronics...
(2)
(0)
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
There are lots of warnings out about NOT using the fingerprint feature with smart phones because the phones do not adequately secure this biometric information and may put you at greater risk of identify theft.
One day they will have a better biometric process but we aren't there yet
One day they will have a better biometric process but we aren't there yet
(2)
(0)
SPC David Hannaman
MSgt Curtis Ellis - "Back end hacking" an excellent point that for some reason I hadn't thought of initially, years ago I (and about 3 dozen other guys) worked at a company in a position that gave us access to every credit card used at any 7-Eleven in a given month.
The opportunity for ID theft was obvious, but to my knowledge nobody ever did.
The opportunity for ID theft was obvious, but to my knowledge nobody ever did.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I'm of two minds on the matter.
Authentication factors are summed up as something you know, something you have, or something you are, the last of which applies to biometrics and is an immutable property of end-users. For this reason, as a sole authentication factor biometrics are even more fraught with peril than passwords. Any system that interprets and transmits your biometric signatures as a signal can be intercepted. IOW, once your fingerprint, retina image, or heart rhythm is captured, you have to assume it's compromised for life.
On the other hand, incorporating biometrics in a multi-factor authentication system as a supplement to passwords and tokens increases the strength of the system and mitigates the cons. At this point the major con is cost of implementation and upkeep and user dissatisfaction with adding an additional step to a standard dual-authentication system (PW + token).
The short version is that just using biometrics would likely be disastrous, but they're worth considering as an additional security measure on top of whatever your organization has already implemented.
Authentication factors are summed up as something you know, something you have, or something you are, the last of which applies to biometrics and is an immutable property of end-users. For this reason, as a sole authentication factor biometrics are even more fraught with peril than passwords. Any system that interprets and transmits your biometric signatures as a signal can be intercepted. IOW, once your fingerprint, retina image, or heart rhythm is captured, you have to assume it's compromised for life.
On the other hand, incorporating biometrics in a multi-factor authentication system as a supplement to passwords and tokens increases the strength of the system and mitigates the cons. At this point the major con is cost of implementation and upkeep and user dissatisfaction with adding an additional step to a standard dual-authentication system (PW + token).
The short version is that just using biometrics would likely be disastrous, but they're worth considering as an additional security measure on top of whatever your organization has already implemented.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
SPC David Hannaman
On one hand biometric data has been used for years for security reasons, as well as fingerprints being on file for people with security clearances, convicted criminals, etc. so it's not too far fetched an idea.
On the other hand, there is a fine line between security and liberty. As you put it, those who are willing to sacrifice one for the other deserve neither.
On one hand biometric data has been used for years for security reasons, as well as fingerprints being on file for people with security clearances, convicted criminals, etc. so it's not too far fetched an idea.
On the other hand, there is a fine line between security and liberty. As you put it, those who are willing to sacrifice one for the other deserve neither.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google