"Face unlock" feature of ICS fail...

[Pliablemoose]

Google does not represent this as being a security feature. Some people just like to pick on Android because they're idiots. You see, stupid people like to find flaws in things and try to make "lulz" when they don't understand the basic purpose of a feature.

Android indicates that facial recognition unlocking is "less secure than a pattern, PIN, or password" when a user goes to set up the feature. Google does not represent this as a "security" feature, but it's an alternative / hands-free way of unlocking a phone. Google says on their page "No more having to remember complicated passwords".

It's a non-issue and dumb fanboys are trying to make it seem like it's something it's not. Go figure.

https://twitter.com/#!/timbray/status/126510193323409408

Yeah, koush has been a dumb Apple fanboy for years now...

Funny how koush is able to point stuff like this out, but it turns into a fanboy name calling festival here...

I posted it because it's interesting, and I'm looking forward to getting my Kindle Fire this week.

 

[LikeLinus]

https://twitter.com/#!/timbray/status/126510193323409408

Yeah, koush has been a dumb Apple fanboy for years now...

I posted it because it's interesting, and I'm looking forward to getting my Kindle Fire this week, my HEAVILY FORKED Android OS'd tablet...

"I work for Google, but the
opinions expressed here are
my own, and no other party
necessarily agrees with them."


Thanks for the TWITTER post. Why don't you post something from GOOGLE that represents the facial feature as being more secure than password. The actual phone says that face recognization is not as safe.

 

[Pliablemoose]

"I work for Google, but the
opinions expressed here are
my own, and no other party
necessarily agrees with them."


Thanks for the TWITTER post. Why don't you post something from GOOGLE that represents the facial feature as being more secure than password. The actual phone says that face recognization is not as safe.

Give it a rest dude, it's messed up, even koush pointed the possibility of a hack to it, and he was right.

 

[LikeLinus]

Give it a rest dude, it's messed up, even koush pointed the possibility of a hack to it, and he was right.

It's not messed up when you understand that Google never said it was more secure than passwords. Only an idiot doesn't mention that Googles own setup screen says that very thing. All you and the other idiots are doing is bending the truth to represent your own agenda. "lulz"




From YouTube. I didn't know that it says the second part about someone who looks similar to you could unlock the phone. So Google has even gone on to imply that it is easily "hacked".

While setting up the face unlock , it says in big bold words:

1. Face recognition is less secure than a pattern, pin or a password.

2. Someone who looks similar to you could unlock your phone.

 

[Ancalagon44]

Did anyone catch one of the youtube comments?

"I dont think this will work well in China..."

Ha ha ha!

 

[Pliablemoose]

It's not messed up when you understand that Google never said it was more secure than passwords. Only an idiot doesn't mention that Googles own setup screen says that very thing. All you and the other idiots are doing is bending the truth to represent your own agenda. "lulz"

And my agenda is to crush Android?

I guess owning a G1, OG Droid, D Inc, ThunderBolt, Hacking Android onto an HD2, 3 nook colors with CM 7 (gave one to daughter & her fiancee each) 3 Samsung Intercepts (again gifts), a Fire, and the Optimus I just ordered from Republic wireless (every last one of them rooted and modded except for the ones I don't have in my physical posession yet) might be a funny way of destroying Android, I need to go back to evil school I guess...

 

[WelshBloke]

And my agenda is to crush Android?

I guess owning a G1, OG Droid, D Inc, ThunderBolt, Hacking Android onto an HD2, 3 nook colors with CM 7 (gave one to daughter & her fiancee each) 3 Samsung Intercepts, a Fire, and the Optimus I just ordered from Republic wireless might be a funny way of destroying Android, I need to go back to evil school I guess...

We dont have to look at the phones you own.

We do however get to see your posts.

 

[Pliablemoose]

We dont have to look at the phones you own.

We do however get to see your posts.

And facial recognition was hacked, was it not?

People saw the ICS demo and thought it was a cool way to lock your phone, I know I did, a prominent Android developer pointed out it could likely be hacked very simply and it can.

I can't get over how you-all get your egos all tied up in a flipping OS... hell the facial recognition is just a feature of ICS.

It's unlikely the tech will work without 2 FFC's, and manufacturers are unlikely to install 2...

(and in the spirit of full disclosure I don't currently own any Apple stock)

 

[WelshBloke]

And facial recognition was hacked, was it not?

People saw the ICS demo and thought it was a cool way to lock your phone, I know I did, a prominent Android developer pointed out it could likely be hacked very simply and it can.

I can't get over how you-all get your egos all tied up in a flipping OS...

Thats hardly hacked.

Its like giving your phone to someone and them slide to unlocking it and you complaining it let them in. Its not meant to be a secure way of locking your phone, theres other ways of doing that.


And as to your lovely passive aggressive last line you could look at your own posts first before blaming everyone else.

 

[LikeLinus]

And facial recognition was hacked, was it not?

People saw the ICS demo and thought it was a cool way to lock your phone, I know I did, a prominent Android developer pointed out it could likely be hacked very simply and it can.

I can't get over how you-all get your egos all tied up in a flipping OS...

It's unlikely the tech will work without 2 FFC's, and manufacturers are unlikely to install 2...

Hacked? No, not at all. That's like saying "I made a duplicate of your key and I unlocked your door, I hacked your door!!!!". That's stupid. The function of the software is to recognize a certain person. The person showed it a picture of the correct person....Hack not found. The software did it's job and identified the person. Again, this isn't a security feature.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Thats hardly hacked.

Its like giving your phone to someone and them slide to unlocking it and you complaining it let them in. Its not meant to be a secure way of locking your phone, theres other ways of doing that.


And as to your lovely passive aggressive last line you could look at your own posts first before blaming everyone else.

LOL, sorry dude, I just did, (now back to my secret agenda of crushing Android...)

 

[Zaap]

I'm definitely an Android fan, and I think facial unlock is a stupid, useless 'feature'. I have since the day I first heard about it here, in the thread about Android support issues.

I never would have thought it was a very good 'security' feature, more like another of these "Hey look what I can do with my phone.. oh wait... it's not working right now... wait a second.. well I swear it worked last time I did it... oh okay, there it goes after the 8th try... wasn't that neat?" type of parlor trick features that seem to be all the rage these days.

 

[WelshBloke]

I'm definitely an Android fan, and I think facial unlock is a stupid, useless 'feature'. I have since the day I first heard about it here, in the thread about Android support issues.

I never would have thought it was a very good 'security' feature, more like another of these "Hey look what I can do with my phone.. oh wait... it's not working right now... wait a second.. well I swear it worked last time I did it... oh okay, there it goes after the 8th try... wasn't that neat?" type of parlor trick features that seem to be all the rage these days.

Yeah, everyone seems guilty of this at the moment.

I think smartphones are so functional and customisable that manufactures are struggling to keep clear blue water between the OSs.

 

[LikeLinus]

I'm definitely an Android fan, and I think facial unlock is a stupid, useless 'feature'. I have since the day I first heard about it here, in the thread about Android support issues.

I never would have thought it was a very good 'security' feature, more like another of these "Hey look what I can do with my phone.. oh wait... it's not working right now... wait a second.. well I swear it worked last time I did it... oh okay, there it goes after the 8th try... wasn't that neat?" type of parlor trick features that seem to be all the rage these days.

It's a useless feature for most people. I guess it could help for people with rheumatoid arthritis, but outside of that I see no use for it. I think mostly it's for kids/teenagers to look cool.

 

[QueBert]

This isn't suppose to be secure? really? Then why the hell did Google add it, for the lulz? It would not be unreasonable for an average person to ASSUME this would be a very safe way to lock your phone. I'm a techie guy since the TRS-80 days and even I thought of this as a security features. But I guess Google added it because they were bored and never meant it to be a an actual useful feature, even though it's one of the main things I always saw hyped up that was coming in any ICS previews I saw. While they're at it they should add the thing that takes a picture of your face and goes online to bring up your drivers license, only it's always shows a license with a picture of a monkey on it.

 

[WelshBloke]

This isn't suppose to be secure? really? Then why the hell did Google add it, for the lulz? It would not be unreasonable for an average person to ASSUME this would be a very safe way to lock your phone. I'm a techie guy since the TRS-80 days and even I thought of this as a security features. But I guess Google added it because they were bored and never meant it to be a an actual useful feature, even though it's one of the main things I always saw hyped up that was coming in any ICS previews I saw. While they're at it they should add the thing that takes a picture of your face and goes online to bring up your drivers license, only it's always shows a license with a picture of a monkey on it.

So youre saying that all the ways of locking smartphones should be secure?

 

[Anubis]

still not sure what the issue is

 

[WelshBloke]

still not sure what the issue is

One OS releases 'fluffy' feature.

Supporters of rival OS start to get intense.

 

[sjwaste]

I'm not reading through the page of shitfest here. I will say, however, that Pliablemoose has no anti-Android agenda. He's openly anti-RIM/BB, but he's otherwise fairly objective with Android and iOS issues.

About the only thing he's a fanboy of are prepaid carriers.

To the point, face unlock is a security feature, if that's what you're arguing over. It has the word "lock" in its name, for crying out loud. What the hell else would that word imply, if not security? It's been circumvented, and that is a security hole.

 

[WelshBloke]

I'm not reading through the page of shitfest here. I will say, however, that Pliablemoose has no anti-Android agenda. He's openly anti-RIM/BB, but he's otherwise fairly objective with Android and iOS issues.

About the only thing he's a fanboy of are prepaid carriers.

To the point, face unlock is a security feature, if that's what you're arguing over. It has the word "lock" in its name, for crying out loud. What the hell else would that word imply, if not security? It's been circumvented, and that is a security hole.

Slide to Unlock

 

[sjwaste]

Slide to Unlock

Yeah, except the facial recognition unlock requires a whole other factor, namely your FACE.

You're trolling.

 

[Pliablemoose]

I'm not reading through the page of shitfest here. I will say, however, that Pliablemoose has no anti-Android agenda. He's openly anti-RIM/BB, but he's otherwise fairly objective with Android and iOS issues.

About the only thing he's a fanboy of are prepaid carriers.

To the point, face unlock is a security feature, if that's what you're arguing over. It has the word "lock" in its name, for crying out loud. What the hell else would that word imply, if not security? It's been circumvented, and that is a security hole.

And I have a damn Verizon contract too

Am planning to drop down to the lowest minimum minutes on the Verizon plan and use republic wireless for voice calls so I can keep the Verizon data. Am hoping the sound quality on rw is worth a crap.

I already killed the texting and use only Google Voice.

 

[WelshBloke]

Yeah, except the facial recognition unlock requires a whole other factor, namely your FACE.

You're trolling.

Really?

Is this the standard response now if you realise you're wrong and don't want to discuss something any more?

 

[sjwaste]

Really?

Is this the standard response now if you realise you're wrong and don't want to discuss something any more?

I gave you two well-reasoned points in addition, yet you chose to key on the trolling. So yes.

 

[WelshBloke]

I gave you two well-reasoned points in addition, yet you chose to key on the trolling. So yes.

You gave one odd point which was you need to take your face with you if you want to use face to unlock.

I think your missing the point of it.

Slide to unlock: Take phone out of pocket. Look at phone. Swipe finger across screen. Use phone.

Face unlock: Take phone out of pocket. Look at phone. Use phone.


Thats it. Its not supposed to be some uberhacker proof lock system.