Posted on 11/01/2014 6:11:30 PM PDT by Swordmaker
“It took you two days to put that out there to cover for Apple?
At least collect a check for it. How pathetic.”
********************************************************************************************************
Like moths drawn to the light, Apple haters are irresistibly attracted to Apple threads to cast aspersions on users of Apple products and spread FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) about Apple products.
These poor tormented souls can’t help themselves as they are trapped in some sort of strange personal hell apparently.
I am talking everyday computers. What mobile phone do you use?
Well if you oppose sodomy in all forms then why are you screwing yourself by only using inferior mobile phones and junky laptops?
Important :
Apple Pay extends user’s credit cards by wrapping them with cryptographic security, without Apple getting any access to existing bank account contents. MCX wants all access right down to SSN.
Of course not. You think they have any money left after buying an iPhone? :-)
No Hostage. Defeating Apple's fingerprint TouchID system has not been broken by anyone. The guy who claimed he had done so two days after its release on the iPhone 5s using a photocopied fingerprint, was testing with his own fingerprint and pressing the photocopy to the iPhone with the same finger. The iPhone was reading the living finger through the photocopy instead of reading the photocopy as he thought. Easily falsified and proved wrong by using the same photocopy with a different finger. That failed to open the iPhone. Sorry. You loser.
The point of the iPhone and ApplePay is to prevent identity theft in the first place! your idiotic scenario is for use after they've stolen the identity, and HAVE the credit card information to enter in Apple accounts on iTunes, and passbook, and the iPhone, you idiot! You have to have your barn wide open and the horses escaped from the barn for YOUR exploit to work. Of course the crooks can steal you blind if they have all that already.
Oh, and no crook worth his salt is going to destroy a thousand dollar iPhone. They'd sell it to a sucker who didn't know it had been used in fraud. Of course, they'd never go through your contorted scenario in the first place. They'd just clone the card multiple times, and use it until it's blocked. . . without spending a $1,000 to buy an "anonymous" iPhone, an unnecessary expense for them.
The rest is just more of your irrational MAPS anti-Apple ranting.
Swordmaker's and Kathy's proposed diagnosis for the new ICD-10 addenda:
90210 iOS Munchausen's Apple-Plexy Syndrome (MAPS), The overwhelming compulsion to post negative, judgmental, aggressive, and false commentary on any website thread related to Apple products wherever found, including phobic reaction to projected Apple product user euphoria. First and subsequent encounters.
In light of the recent court ruling, I can see why many would not want it used as a security at all, opting rather for a password.
But, oddly, you feel compelled to go out of your way to tell people who don’t agree and don’t care.
SPARC? How old is that relic?
That’s a lot of effort and expense for someone whom photographing and cloning a CC is no big deal.
That court decision still requires a search warrant. . . and the simple way to even defeat that is to switch off the iPhone or iPad. Once you do that it requires a passcode, not just a fingerprint. Also, after not being open for 48 hours requires passcode. Then even a search warrant cannot compel you to open it. This court's decision won't stand scrutiny. His argument that it is similar to getting a fingerprint for ID purposes is specious, as is his equivalence to providing DNA for ID comparisons. These are two different purposes entirely.
Similarly a series of letters can be used to convey information or it can be a tool to unlock a door. One intrinsically is the data, the other only provides access to the data. Two different purposes. Similarly, a fingerprint, can BE the data or it can be the tool to access the data. Two different purposes. The judge has confabulated the purposes. Stupid.
"......and the simple way to even defeat that is to switch off the iPhone or iPad"
Good to know. My 6+ is due this week.
No mobile phone and no laptop. I have no need for either.
2011.
> “No Hostage. Defeating Apple’s fingerprint TouchID system has not been broken by anyone.”
You’re quick to step in it without asking for details and that makes you both look foolish.
Purchase an iphone and there are two choices:
1. Imprint your own fingerprint.
2. Imprint your finger wearing a membrane with a fake fingerprint or one of someone you don’t like.
Because if your goal is to use the iphone as a means of theft, then you want nothing pointing back to you so option 1 above is not an option for the hacker/thief.
Therefore, option 2 is the only option and finger membranes are easy to make or obtain, and they are easier than contact lenses to use.
Again, this security scheme of Apple’s is a farce and springs from arrogance. The scheme is second rate, could be concocted by any second rate engineer, isn’t novel but is pushed by a company looking for a new edge to replace the disappearing one left by Jobs.
Really, you wouldn’t know real security even if it was pointed out to you because real security blends in with ambient backgrounds and contexts.
And I wasn’t kidding when I said that if you were on the inside of real security you would not be heard from again. You would be alive but never seen or heard from.
By the way, fingerprint security has been around since the 1980s by DOD contractors. Lockheed was involved. They scrapped it because it is so easily defeated.
And if you want to see the junkyard of security inventions, get a tour of an MIT lab where they have a history of working hundreds of thousands of proposals. Each scientist is given a time and a budget and if they don’t work it out they toss their work on the scrap heap and move on to something else (they actually put the equipment or blueprints on an electronic media on a shelf in storage).
Other scientists may retrieve from the junk pile and try a different approach but in most cases the tried inventions that failed remain failed. Touch ID is a rehash of a junked invention and it makes Apple look stupid which they are now without Jobs.
But go on with your cheerleading as it draws attention to your inability to learn anything but what you want to hear and see. And you won’t stop cheerleading because you have too much vested in it which makes you ...well, let’s observe FR protocols here.
And I will repeat, and you should listen carefully: The Internet was scrapped by the military and by federal security offices in the 1980s because it was proved to be impossible to secure. Now decades later you have some truly stupid people thinking they can secure it.
You should study and learn from a related thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3222328/posts
Apple’s tryst really is an “attempt to shoehorn an intractable problem into a solution” and I will bet you that some of their bright computer scientists know it but are scared to death to bring it up in front of the Pink Fascist in charge.
I can see that the Touch ID was an afterthought. Someone quickly thought of the stolen phone scenario and the marketeers at Apple decided to patch in a failed tech to cover up the flaw.
1. Let’s see you try it.
2. It’s still a lot harder than copying a 19 digit number.
Let us know when someone breaches Apple Pay.
Actually a nineteen digit number security system is pretty robust. What has evolved around it is a sort of fire alarm and fire sprinkler system. When a breach happens the system springs into action to minimize the severity of the damage. And the losses are minimized and written off.
What Apple is touting is a new system they say ‘prevents’ security breaches. And it does not. In fact it inadvertently assists hackers once they break in by keeping the break-in hidden and difficult to detect.
So the networks will ask why should they invest in this new local token scheme security when in fact it is so easily defeated. The risk-reward is not worth replacing the current system which works well enough as-is for the network operators, banks and card providers to make nice profits.
Sorry but I think Apple is hyping its Apple Pay to an image of invincibility and exclusive must-have, and they will fail badly in the next 2 years with it. I have been involved in R&D for more than 30 years and have served a principal investigator advisor to Venture Capital Firms, Hedge Firms and Academic Advisory Boards for hundreds and hundreds of startups and incubators.
I have a simple slide that I think over time has become an observation that should be in every person’s thought inventory. And that is for every 1000 inventions proposed, possibly only 1 or 2 will find commercial success. It is a profound observation because many of the scientists and engineers behind innovations that fail are the cream of the crop and their ideas and inventions are astounding until they are injected into commerce and then they fail miserably. I have example after example, hundreds of examples of ‘sure things’ that went wrong.
The only one looking foolish here is you, Hostage. . . and idiotic. I said the iPhone security could not be broken, I did not say it could not be spoofed. It certainly can but it not "easy to make or obtain, nor easier to use than a contact lens." The only person who has accomplished it has done so using super glue deposition techniques, casting a thin film membrane, picking up the super-glued imprint of the correct fingerprint, and then gluing it on a living finger. . . And even then got a one positive result in six attempts result in unlocking the iPhone with TouchID. He bemoaned that Apple did not lock out TouchID after a certain number of false tries, apparently unaware it now requires a passcode after five failed attempts.
“I don’t see this to be a risk to consumers in any way because I don’t think criminals are sophisticated enough,” Rogers said in an email interview. “It is difficult to make these fingerprints—think of Touch ID as being the equivalent of a door lock. It's there to stop the average criminal from getting access, or in the case of Touch ID, claiming they are you.”Not only does a potential hacker need a clear print from their target that can be lifted by using super glue fumes and fingerprint powder, they will also have to get access to lab equipment to photograph, print, and then cast the fingerprint using chemicals and smearing it with glue. Unless you have access to a crime laboratory, the equipment is prohibitively expensive. . . .
Even though Rogers is impressed with the technology, he says Apple could do more to keep devices secure. Some improvements, he says, could include limits on the number of unlocking attempts a device will allow, a fallback to a passcode when the device hasn’t been used for a specific amount of time, and “best practices” suggested by Apple which may include using different fingers for different authentication.
So your "easy" claim is shot down completely. Again, your idiotic scenario from before was an after the ID theft exploit, this requires a complex technology scenario to spoof access not available to the average thief. Rogers failed to notice that Apple has already implemented all excet the different finger for different authentication security, which I think would be a good idea.
Could the police use this technique? Yes.
Really, you wouldn’t know real security even if it was pointed out to you because real security blends in with ambient backgrounds and contexts.
That's a bunch of words strung together that means absolutely nothing in this context. Much like all of your anti-Apple posts.
I can see that the Touch ID was an afterthought.. Someone quickly thought of the stolen phone scenario and the marketeers at Apple decided to patch in a failed tech to cover up the flaw.
You cannot see beyond your deranged hatred of anything Apple. As I said, you suffer from MAPS. ApplePay is far better than anything else being offered at this time and the Creditcard companies and banks, who ARE far better versed in such security matters than YOU, Hostage, have vetted it and accepted it as such, and are signing on, putting their money at risk—something they HAVE NOT DONE with Google Wallet. I think I will trust their judgment far better than some anonymous anti-Apple idiot on the Internet who has amply demonstrated his ignorance in the past. You. My brother-in-law was the head of IT Security for MasterCard for many years until his retirement. He thinks Apple has nailed it for point of sales security for consumers. Again, I think he knows one hell of a lot more about what's requ than you do. . . and he is not any kind of Apple user.
Your claim literally denies reality, Hostage. The major Creditcard companies with the sole exception of Discover which is a subsidiary of Sears Holdings, a backer of CurrentC, and most of the major banks you say won't make the investment have already agreed to make the investment and they have already deployed it. Sorry. You lose again. It's already in place. It's called NFC. AGAIN, you are making yourself look foolish.
So far, you are the only one I see claiming it is easily defeated. Please prove you allegation before continuing with your lies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.