this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2023
461 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

74130 readers
3447 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Luci@lemmy.ca 32 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (5 children)

Stop using biometrics for authentication!!!!!

Edit: lots of opinions below. Biometrics are a username, a thing you are. Finger printed can be taken from your laptop with a little powder and masking tape.

Use an authentacator app or security key kids!!

[–] TORFdot0@lemmy.world 23 points 2 years ago

Better put would be stop using biometrics for single factor authentication. A token can be stolen, or a passcode/push notification can be phished/bypassed as easy as biometrics can.

[–] Bootheal0179@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (1 children)

In Doom I had to rip off a dudes arm to gain access to the security controls on core cooling shutdown. If you don’t want to lose an arm to stop a demon horde, you’re better off just using your girlfriend’s fingerprints

[–] Luci@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Exactly the point I'm trying to make!!

[–] Bootheal0179@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

No… I get it totally. That why I know my girl’s worth my time, she’s willing to potentially give up her arm for me to still play DOOM 8 days a week

[–] 0xD 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

A username is not something "you are", it's something "you know". Biometrics are not nearly the same as usernames.

[–] Luci@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

A username is something you are. It's you! You are 0xD.
A password is something you know. A security key is something you have.

When we interview security analysts you don't get past the first round if you disagree.

[–] feddylemmy@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If your interview involves telling me a username is "something you are" rather than "something you know", I'm running away from that job as fast as I can.

[–] Luci@lemmy.ca -2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Other people know your username.

How hard is this?

[–] Blueteamsecguy 1 points 2 years ago

I guarantee you I know thousands of people's passwords as well, I just don't know the username associated.

[–] sirfancy@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago

By this same logic, other people could know your fingerprint since it's "something you are". No, other people cannot know your fingerprint. It's a complex mathematical equation to a computer. This is such a terrible take.

Source: CASP+ certified.

[–] 0xD 3 points 2 years ago

No, this username is one of the names I've chosen for the accounts I use on lemmy. It does not identify me, it identifies the lemmy accounts that I just so happen to know the password for. I was just about to create an account with your username on another instance but meh, that's too much work. Just imagine me having done that and think about what you just wrote.

I would be vary of the people agreeing with you on something so basic yet so wrong.

An authentication factor is a unique identifier that shows that you possess something that others don't. Biometrics are something you are because your fingerprints, your retinas, or your DNA are (mostly) unique to you. A security key is something you have because unique cryptographic material is saved on the hardware device that cannot be replicated somewhere else (which is why many mobile authenticators really aren't). And a password is something you know because... Bla bla bla.

To be pedantic, a username is not a factor in this sense at all; It is an identifier for an account that you have to prove authorization for by presenting some kind of factor, sometimes multiple.

[–] Rustmilian@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Exactly, it's fundamentally insecure.

[–] BorgDrone@lemmy.one 30 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

As with all things security, it depends entirely on your thread model and the value of what you’re trying to protect.

Biometrics can be a much more secure option than using a PIN or password, depending in circumstances.

For example: when I’m working on my laptop on the train or in a coffee shop and I need to log into some website I’d rather use my fingerprint to unlock the passkey than type in a password in a public place where I have no idea who is observing me entering my password.

Same goes for paying with your phone, you can either enter your phone PIN in a crowded supermarket or you unlock with FaceID.

Also, for phones, for a lot of people the alternative to biometrics wouldn’t be a PIN, it would be no authentication whatsoever. Biometrics lowers the barrier to having a form of authentication at all.

[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com -3 points 2 years ago

for a lot of people the alternative to biometrics

Full password Android user representing here... It's surprising how few people bother to even stop any amount of snooping on their phones. but I guess it's only surprising in that I wished more from society in general.

[–] Mongostein@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 years ago (2 children)
[–] seaQueue@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Biometrics can be spoofed, or the body part stolen in extreme cases.

Also, in the US at least, biometrics aren't protected by the same rights that allow you to not incriminate yourself. IIRC they're considered a thing you have, which you can be compelled to surrender or use to unlock a device, vs something you know (like a password or pattern) which you can withhold if it would be incriminating. Check with a lawyer on this one, I haven't paid attention to the case law here for a bit.

[–] Squeak@lemmy.world 24 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

If someone is stealing my body parts, what they access on my devices is the least of my worries!

[–] wmassingham@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

They don't have to be stolen. Imagine some clever thief drugging your drink, then when you're incapacitated they take your phone and press your finger to it or hold it up to your face to unlock it, then transfer all your money out of Venmo or whatever money transfer app you have on your phone.

[–] Squeak@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

The comment I replied to said stolen, which is what I was getting at.

There’s also nothing to stop someone watching over your shoulder to see your PIN for your phone/laptop. Nothing is infallible.

[–] jimbo@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago

God, the shit people dream up to worry themselves about. Nobody is drugging you to unlock your phone.

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Ask OPM how they plan on getting my fingerprints back.

[–] ExpensiveConstant@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

How are biometrics fundamentally insecure?

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 16 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

If it is low detail enough to consistently 'work', it isn't complex enough to be better than something like a chip and pin approach.

They are repeatedly bypassed with easy hacks like silly putty and photographs. People's biometrics are not unchanging. Burned fingers, swollen eyes, and sore throats are things that can change enough to make biosecurity unreliable. That is before cold and heat and how they effect biological things!

That is all before you take into account the fact that some people don't have whatever is being used. Have fun using eye based biosecurity on someone with cataracts or is missing their eyes entirely due to injury or just being born without them fully developed. Or they have a physical issue that makes it hard for them to interact with the bio reader. Stephen Hawking needing to lean towards a mounted eye scanner would be impossible for example.

So either you have mediocre security that allows for a lot of false positives to get through or you end up having to add a bypass system for when it fails, and now you have two ways that security can be defeated! A non-biological solution with two factor authentication of an item and a PIN or other knowledge piece is far more secure than biosecurity can ever be.

So already insecure, but in addition to that anyone with physical access to the person can force them to do the biosecurity. Police are able to force someone to put their finger on their phone, or look at the screen for a face unlock. Maybe they aren't legally able to, but it is a good example of not being secure.

[–] Rustmilian@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I couldn't have said it better.

Not to mention that a company could easily harvest this information, just look at FTC for example.

[–] bilb@lem.monster -4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Well I could have, but simply chose not to.

[–] snooggums@kbin.social -3 points 2 years ago
[–] TORFdot0@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

They aren't 100% reliable and it has its' challenges based on its implementation but I wouldn't consider it fundamentally insecure. It's as secure as a NFC token, TOTP, or a push notification as a form of authentication. It's like birth control, no method is 100% safe and effective, but plain username and password auth is like pulling out, anything is better than that.

[–] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Not on my Lenovo. Fingerprint reader requires a swipe, no print left behind.

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

I have a lot of questions about what this guy thinks the rest of your device is covered in. Because spoiler, it's fingerprints.

[–] derpgon@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago

Mine does not work at all. I'd like to see the guy trying to take fingerprints for a few hours and realizing it won't do shit lol.