Posted on 10/01/2018 6:59:16 AM PDT by LibWhacker
It finally happened. The feds forced an Apple iPhone X owner to unlock their device with their face.
A child abuse investigation unearthed by Forbes includes the first known case in which law enforcement used Apple Face ID facial recognition technology to open a suspect's iPhone. That's by any police agency anywhere in the world, not just in America.
It happened on August 10, when the FBI searched the house of 28-year-old Grant Michalski, a Columbus, Ohio, resident who would later that month be charged with receiving and possessing child pornography. With a search warrant in hand, a federal investigator told Michalski to put his face in front of the phone, which he duly did. That allowed the agent to pick through the suspect's online chats, photos and whatever else he deemed worthy of investigation.
The case marks another significant moment in the ongoing battle between law enforcement and tech providers, with the former trying to break the myriad security protections put in place by the latter. Since the fight between the world's most valuable company and the FBI in San Bernardino over access to an iPhone in 2016, Forbes has been tracking the various ways cops have been trying to break Apple's protections.
First came multiple cases in which suspects were told to unlock iPhones with their fingerprints, via Apple's Touch ID biometric login. The same technique was then used on dead subjects.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Their face?
He had more than one?................
Facial recognition is convenient for the user, but I would personally rather input a code. Maybe a combination of face recognition or thumbprint AND a code would be better.
“Rag doll” theory of search warrant.
If police can use your limp uncooperative body to gather information, they don’t need your consent.
And if you’re trying to secure information related to illegal/immoral activity, don’t use biometrics for security.
BTW: pressing the volume-up and sleep buttons together disables Face ID. You can also disable biometrics outright, specify a long complex passcode, and set the device to “brick” after 10 failed attempts. Apple has done everything they can to provide real security if you want it, while also providing the convenience of biometrics if you prefer.
(Apparently Forbes is now staffed by illiterates too.)
Read this earlier this morning—they used a search warrant, so not an issue. But they could just as easily ignored that step. Seems fingerprints and face need more explicit protection or recognition. As I am preparing to buy a new Xs Max with facial recognition, my only consolation is that I don’t do anything illegal. Like fingerprints, I’ll turn on facial recognition.
Or they are two-faced..................
Some people do, ya know..Lou Christie for example.
Ping!
Hey, would a PHOTOGRAPH unlock the iPhone?...............
Their face?
He had more than one?................
—
It’s the f’ing pronoun problem. If I were a writer on a well-known publication, I would use “their” also. Easy way to side-step the thought police.
Just drop the ‘their’ altogether.............
Two factor authentication is your friend.
Something you have.
Something you know.
Your face, your fingerprint, your retina, etc.
A simple passcode that’s in your memory.
Search warrant won’t help them.
But maybe Apple Corp. would.
well THIS sounds like something that could tie-up our entire Federal court system for the next thirteen years...
I know. People have really butchered our language. They’re afraid to use the masculine and feminine.
I have the iPhone X and I believe a photograph is insufficient. The way Apple implemented FaceID — and I’m probably simplifying the actual process — is that it uses stereo cameras (one visible, one IR) with a projected IR dot grid to build a 3D mesh of your face from multiple angles.
The calculated values are hashed and stored in a protected area of the phone, accessible only through Apple’s interface.
A photograph would not return the correct depth map and would be rejected. It’s actually quite amazing what they pulled of. It’s accurate, fairly quick, and works in a wide variety of lighting conditions.
It can even work if you are wearing glasses (including sunglasses) or haven’t shaved in a while. Although I’ve found after about 10 days of going without a shave it can get a little confused sometimes.
As always, you can disable it and go to a complex passcode if you prefer.
hmmm, and yet you can pay for things this way...
Ping
I don’t know but I’m betting not. The article says they’ve designed in “liveliness” detection; i.e., Apple has tried to make certain facial recognition won’t work with a person’s dead face. They didn’t say exactly how they achieved that... whether by looking for color in the face or looking for small movements in the eyes or muscles of one’s face, etc.
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.