News WorldCoin Attracts 2 Million Users, Hundreds Line-up To Stare at the Orb

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
I wouldn't give up my biometric information unless/until I had a very compelling reason to do so. Unlike a password, you can't just change your eyeballs if your info gets hacked.

Also, increased use of biometrics just means we're going to see more cases of identity theft involving actual kidnapping. If you like that idea and ever expect to have enough assets to make it worth someone's while, then go right ahead.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KyaraM
bit_user said:
I wouldn't give up my biometric information unless/until I had a very compelling reason to do so. Unlike a password, you can't just change your eyeballs if your info gets hacked.

Also, increased use of biometrics just means we're going to see more cases of identity theft involving actual kidnapping. If you like that idea and ever expect to have enough assets to make it worth someone's while, then go right ahead.
Click to expand...
Right now your file of biometric data the DHS has is being transferred to the cloud in the care of Amazon Web Services. https://nypost.com/2020/05/07/homeland-security-to-move-biometric-database-to-amazon-cloud/
It hit a few snags along the way when the company tasked with doing this - Northrop Grumman's relevant part was bought by some company Peraton, founded in 2017 by Veritas Capital - itself founded in 1992 and has 114 employees.

If you read the wiki on these it looks like our biometric data has just been tossed to the sharks. But I've probably just been playing too much CP2077 in anticipation of the DLC.

The less of it that gets migrated to the cloud the better. What are the odds that this "well meaning" biometric data collection startup gets picked like a ripe berry as soon as it has finished collecting? Apparently there are some pretty deep pockets out there.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: KyaraM
rluker5 said:
Right now your file of biometric data the DHS has is being transferred to the cloud in the care of Amazon Web Services. https://nypost.com/2020/05/07/homeland-security-to-move-biometric-database-to-amazon-cloud/
Click to expand...
Let's be realistic, though. The only data they would have on me is a photo from my Real ID drivers license and passport photo.

I obviously had no choice, in that matter. However, I never provided anyone with an iris scan, and I'm not about to unless there's an extremely compelling reason to do so.
 
Well, they all....around. Now they're gonna find out. No, you shouldn't feel even the slightest amount of pity when it happens either. They went in to this...eyes wide open....
 
  • Like
Reactions: sitehostplus
Anybody considering crypto-anything should visit Molly White's excellent blog "Web3 Is Going Just Great". There's an almost daily cadence of scams, rug-pulls, exploits, thefts, hacks, bankruptcies etc - generally for tens of millions of dollars. And this has been going on for years. It's amazing that there are still some folks who haven't been robbed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KyaraM
bit_user said:
Let's be realistic, though. The only data they would have on me is a photo from my Real ID drivers license and passport photo.

I obviously had no choice, in that matter. However, I never provided anyone with an iris scan, and I'm not about to unless there's an extremely compelling reason to do so.
Click to expand...
You have a passport so I'm guessing you go through immigration. How do you know you aren't giving an iris scan when they make you stand in front of the camera for a few seconds? They wouldn't let me keep my glasses on for some reason, even though any normal person can see right through them. They are at least getting a real thorough face scan. You know AI is just getting better at enhancing pics for recognition. Voice mapping can be done as well.

Also I give 3 blood samples every year for an annual physical. Seems like a lot for their uses. And got fingerprinted through boy scouts. And when I go to the optometrist I get the impression that after I've used their eye computer thing they are just putting on a show, going through the motions. They can collect a lot.

But I'm just playing devil's advocate. I avoid giving biometrics as well. When I knowingly can at least.

If you want a laugh, here's a CRS document that goes south entertainingly quickly. It is barely 3 pages:
 
bit_user said:
I wouldn't give up my biometric information unless/until I had a very compelling reason to do so. Unlike a password, you can't just change your eyeballs if your info gets hacked.

Also, increased use of biometrics just means we're going to see more cases of identity theft involving actual kidnapping. If you like that idea and ever expect to have enough assets to make it worth someone's while, then go right ahead.
Click to expand...
Why do kidnapping when you can just hack the database, steal the digital biometric info from said database, and use that to hack into anything you want?
 
rluker5 said:
You have a passport so I'm guessing you go through immigration. How do you know you aren't giving an iris scan when they make you stand in front of the camera for a few seconds?
Click to expand...
Because I know a few things about iris scanners, including someone who actually built one in a bid for a military contract. I wouldn't say it's outright impossible, but highly unlikely.

rluker5 said:
They wouldn't let me keep my glasses on for some reason, even though any normal person can see right through them.
Click to expand...
Because glasses affect the accuracy of facial recognition systems. I have firsthand experience testing & deploying some of them.

rluker5 said:
Also I give 3 blood samples every year for an annual physical. Seems like a lot for their uses. And got fingerprinted through boy scouts. And when I go to the optometrist I get the impression that after I've used their eye computer thing they are just putting on a show, going through the motions. They can collect a lot.
Click to expand...
This is all straight-up paranoia. The government would need to issue a specific warrant for them to collect such samples or data from anyone who has it, and I rather doubt your optometrist retains the raw retinal scan images.

As for the 3 blood samples, it's quite likely because they send the samples off to different labs to run different subsets of the tests they do. All that would be needed for collecting DNA is a couple drops of blood, so I don't follow why it makes any difference how much is collected.

BTW, I don't recall ever giving fingerprint samples, in Boy Scouts. I'm guessing you were involved as a adult troop leader, and they wanted to run a background check on you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Francisco Alexandre Pires and KyaraM
sitehostplus said:
Why do kidnapping when you can just hack the database, steal the digital biometric info from said database, and use that to hack into anything you want?
Click to expand...
The "hacking" approach exists as a theoretical possibility and one that's unavailable to the vast majority of criminals out there. But, if they can just kidnap you and make you unlock your account at gunpoint, that's something most of them can manage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Francisco Alexandre Pires
Francisco Alexandre Pires said:
Your iris is unique > the encryption process generates a unique hash > your iris being scanned again would generate the same hash > you're already here, human, go away.
Click to expand...
Its an image of your iris though.
It has a limited number of pixels.
There's no way two images of your iris are going to be identical, so the hash would be different...
That's what I mean
They'd need to take multiple images of your iris to be able to get a perfect comparison each time.
Not sure how many, but for fingerprints, they don't just take one. as far as i'm aware.
😉
 
  • Like
Reactions: Francisco Alexandre Pires
Evildead_666 said:
Its an image of your iris though.
Click to expand...
No, it's not. They said the images are deleted and only the "hash" remains.

Evildead_666 said:
It has a limited number of pixels.
There's no way two images of your iris are going to be identical, so the hash would be different...
Click to expand...
Hash is a poor word. It's not actually a hash, because hashes lack stability. Like I explained, these types of systems typically use high-dimensional vector of real numbers. The vector contains stable features, so that they match reliably.

Evildead_666 said:
They'd need to take multiple images of your iris to be able to get a perfect comparison each time.
Click to expand...
Think of it like face recognition. A face recognition system doesn't need to see a face with exactly the same lighting, angle, and lens to recognize it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Francisco Alexandre Pires and Evildead_666
Francisco Alexandre Pires said:
ah, I didn't understand that.

I didn't think that would be an issue (your iris is always the same irrespective of how big your pupil is), so I'd assume there are tolerances or at least that that's been taken into account.

Maybe @bit_user knows whether that's a problem?
Click to expand...
They'd have to take at least 5 or 10 images to be sure to be able to recognize it accurately every time, or 99% of the time even...
Yeah, bit_user seems to have some knowledge of this, maybe he can help here.
 
bit_user said:
No, it's not. They said the images are deleted and only the "hash" remains.


Hash is a poor word. It's not actually a hash, because hashes lack stability. Like I explained, these types of systems typically use high-dimensional vector of real numbers


Think of it like face recognition. A face recognition system doesn't need to see a face with exactly the same lighting, angle, and lens to recognize it.
Click to expand...
Ahh, hadn't thought of it like that.
Thanks for the explanation :)
 
bit_user said:
The "hacking" approach exists as a theoretical possibility and one that's unavailable to the vast majority of criminals out there. But, if they can just kidnap you and make you unlock your account at gunpoint, that's something most of them can manage.
Click to expand...
They could also kidnap you, and make you log into your online bank account at gunpoint too. Nothing new there, except for the use of biometric data.

There are also ways to hire a hacker, but since this is Tom's Hardware, I'm not going to divulge how it's done.
 
bit_user said:
Well, if we're to believe the new system will be secure, then kidnapping would be more necessary for identity thieves than it currently is.
Click to expand...
Not really,

The only real difference is you don't have to memorize complex passwords on the many sites you do visit. Just flash your eyeball, and you're logged in.

It's a convenience more than anything.
 
sitehostplus said:
The only real difference is you don't have to memorize complex passwords on the many sites you do visit. Just flash your eyeball, and you're logged in.
Click to expand...
Somebody can steal your password without ever meeting you. However, if they can't hack the authentication system, then they need you to flash your eyeballs. On the flip side, if they do hack it, then potentially you need a new set of eyeballs.

Having said that, I do think there's a way they could change the feature-extraction algorithm and give you a new signature. The system would need to remember that the old signature is no longer valid. Whether they offer these sorts capabilities remains to be seen, but hacks would certainly be troublesome and expensive.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Evildead_666
bit_user said:
Somebody can steal your password without ever meeting you. However, if they can't hack the authentication system, then they need you to flash your eyeballs. On the flip side, if they do hack it, then potentially you need a new set of eyeballs.

Having said that, I do think there's a way they could change the feature-extraction algorithm and give you a new signature. The system would need to remember that the old signature is no longer valid. Whether they offer these sorts capabilities remains to be seen, but hacks would certainly be troublesome and expensive.
Click to expand...
Presumably, since you have to flash your eye balls every time you transact, there are lots of opportunities for apps or even fake terminals to intercept the data without a user knowing. That's a whole lot easier than the kid napping route.
 
jp7189 said:
Presumably, since you have to flash your eye balls every time you transact, there are lots of opportunities for apps or even fake terminals to intercept the data without a user knowing.
Click to expand...
It's no easier than intercepting a password. The problem is that you have only one set of eyeballs, whereas a password can be changed. Also, if this ends up being a universal authentication system, as they seem to be planning, then it raises the stakes for such exploits vs. grabbing just a couple passwords for random websites.

jp7189 said:
That's a whole lot easier than the kid napping route.
Click to expand...
The key question is exactly what is sent to the authentication provider? Either they need to distribute the deep learning model to every app & device capable of authenticating, so that it can do the feature-extraction, or they just upload the high-res image to the cloud-based authentication service. If it's the latter, then your PC or phone wouldn't be able to intercept the actual key.

Even having a snapshot of someone's iris would be bad, since you could just upload that to authenticate them. However, it'd be interesting if they went so far as to store a signature computed over each image submitted for authentication, so they could detect if you were trying to reuse an old image.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Francisco Alexandre Pires
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom