Community weekly poll: Which biometric device would you most like to see?
- 10/18/05 2:05 PM
All are subject to dramatic change,...
by ThurmoNuke - 10/18/05 6:54 PM In reply to: Which biometric device would you most like to see? by Marc Bennett
... In todays activities within human lifestyles the eventual change in biometric trace factors is bound to happen. An accident or solid punch to the eye or face, a wet-saw or rock face disfiguring prints, distortion or loss of voice due to illness, any number of circumstances can alter any one choosen form of bio.-ID. I once had a print scanner take a half an hour to scan any part of my hand that would identify me, only to result in failure and the eventual old fashing ink just to record I had been there claiming to be the person on my drivers license. This was due to my prints being removed be the use of a diamond blade of a wet-saw. What a pain it would be if I couldn't buy groceries till my prints grew back. Just a thought. JT
I want to give you the finger
by rcardona2k - 10/18/05 7:02 PM In reply to: Which biometric device would you most like to see? by Marc Bennett
I think fingerprinting is the way to go. I can give the finger to authentication.
biometrics
by martinb - 10/18/05 7:09 PM In reply to: Which biometric device would you most like to see? by Marc Bennett
I'd like to see at least two, preferably three, used in conjunction including voice.
Fingerprint reader
by leh - 10/18/05 7:39 PM In reply to: Which biometric device would you most like to see? by Marc Bennett
I use one now for basic logons,it is a MS product and works very well. You should register at least two fingers. I did and it was worth it. I cut one finger and whilst the cut was still healing the biometric reader rejected the print. There was no residual scar and within a couple of weeks it was accepted again. I would have a concern to trust an eye to a public or semi-public biometric reader and doubt if there would be a high takeup rate on anything to do with eyesight. Fingerprint readers would have to be controlled in their access or vandals will easilly render them useless with spraypaint. LH Australia
re: biometric device
by terryfowler - 10/18/05 7:43 PM In reply to: Which biometric device would you most like to see? by Marc Bennett
How does a retinal scanner cope with the results of aging, our bodies inevitably change, small blood vessels in the eye give rise to what are known as floaters. For 73 years I have known who I am and I don't really see why I shpuld need to prove my existence because of thieves and vagabonds. Hopefully normal care, concealing pin numbers and destroying essential parts of documents such as name and address before throwing them in the trash will stop identity theft. The problem with introducing these technical devices at 'point of sale' is 1. cost (that will eventually be passed back to the consumer) 2. they breakdown as all devices do, usually at a critical time (then what happens for example in a busy supermarket queue).
'They' said that 'Chip and Pin' would be the answer to card fraud but I find some of these wonderful devices broken in local shops and reliance being placed on signatures.
biometric id
by 3MACS - 10/18/05 7:57 PM In reply to: Which biometric device would you most like to see? by Marc Bennett
It really doesn't matter what method is picked for identifying persons there will always be persons out there who fake it somehow or steal someone else's id. 3MACS
Here's a gruesome reason I don't like the fingerprint idea
by OhioJoe2 - 10/18/05 8:44 PM In reply to: Which biometric device would you most like to see? by Marc Bennett
Then, cutting off a finger of a person who has access to major funds/info and applying a heater to simulate the average temperature of a finger that is connected to a living being, you have a motive for cutting off fingers.
Joe
IRIS scans, and commets re: stealing fingers etc.
by baldwinl - 10/19/05 9:22 AM In reply to: Here's a gruesome reason I don't like the fingerprint idea by OhioJoe2better than retinal scans are iris scans - they require a less invasive picture. In fact, it can be done without your knowledge and through sunglasses.
Re: the comment about lasers and eye-scans? No worries - LASERs are NOT used, only simple sources like LEDs.
Re: the comment about this being scary because it may encourage thieves to steal your finger or eyeball - also bogus (sorry, you watch to many crap movies). Any secure method will also check to make sure that the body part is still attached to the owner. For an iris or retinal scan, that could involve a little flash of light and looking for the pupil to contract. For a thumb print, it could be looking for the pulse (think of the finger-touch kind that is built into treadmills at the gym). A simple LED and sensor can look for both pulse and blood oxygen levels. None just look for "body temperature". That method 1) is not secure and 2) would lock out lots of valid users in cold climates (fingers can get very cold while still attached!).
Re: mark of the beast - well, that is not even worth comment except to dispell the myth that any barcode starts with "666"
Too many crap movies?
by OhioJoe2 - 10/25/05 9:48 PM In reply to: IRIS scans, and commets re: stealing fingers etc. by baldwinlNope. Never saw or heard of this gruesoem way of cutting off a finger and using it to bypass security. Totally original thought. 
What happened is I didn't think of s pulse reader.
And I agree with the "Omigod, it's 666!" wierdoes. First, "666" is not the original number in the hebrew text. Second, believing in biblical horror predictions is silly. Third, being told that when someone calls your belief silly is doing what he devil wants, you are closer to a cult.
Joe
Fingerprints
by George B. Lockwood - 10/18/05 8:50 PM In reply to: Which biometric device would you most like to see? by Marc Bennett
This basic method of fingerprints has been around for many years and has proven to be the best identification up to the DNA process of todays world.
Touching a simple print pad itentify's the person. Retinal scanner has been used, but what if one blinks, sensor at the wrong angle, etc.
Biometrics
by tkurihara - 10/18/05 9:44 PM In reply to: Which biometric device would you most like to see? by Marc Bennett
I have been marginally successful in passing the retina scan machines at the Pentagon Athletic Club and the Registered Traveler pilot programs. I have been 100 percent successful in every attempt using finger print scan on my NEC laptop and at the Registered Traveler kiosk; and using a early version of a hand scanner. Suggest that there is less variablity using the finger print scanner compared to the voice recognition, and retina and face scanners. Start simply and move forward toward combining the different technologies to verify the identity of a "person." TMK
we have les and less control with each new attempt to
by papabil1176 - 10/18/05 9:44 PM In reply to: Which biometric device would you most like to see? by Marc Bennett
computerize everything we do. My bank routinely robs me with mysterious charges that no human is responsible for. Policy is decided by a computer.I want someone who knows me human to human being giving authority to take money from my account not a machine. When decisions are made impersonally no one is held accountable. We are losing the idea of accountability. People can be cheated and no one feels bad about it because no one is responsible. This is another step in depersonalization and lack of accountability.
Biometrics
by dignitas - 10/18/05 9:54 PM In reply to: Which biometric device would you most like to see? by Marc Bennett
This is way too 1984 for me. GPS units in everything - phones, cars, etc. Finally, I've seen way too many action movies where the bad guys cut off a hand, finger, gouge out an eye, just to get the pattern. None of the above thank you!
USE EVERYTHING, OR Atleast the voice so you can stay alive
by arhjk - 10/18/05 10:08 PM In reply to: Which biometric device would you most like to see? by Marc Bennett
I say we use everything, to make it secure, but the voice is probably best. Anyone can cut off your finger for scanning and the same can go for the rest of your body parts. I know it's extreme, but say if it was for something really important, then at that point you don't want to make it fingerprint, which is just the easiest to get into. Voice recognitions is hardest to break because no one can replicate your voice while you are not their, of course they could record it... but lets just hope they don't know your password, or that you don't say it.
Voice
by joeabecker52 - 10/18/05 11:41 PM In reply to: Which biometric device would you most like to see? by Marc Bennett
I vote for voice recog. Who knows what the long term effects are with retinal scanning. Fingerprints? Germs. And what if someone has dirty hands like grease or heavy dirt? Will they still work? Who's going to clean either of the two above? How many clean restrooms do you see in stores? Why would these devices be any different?
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
