Couldn't it work like a smart card chip? Meaning: The chip that does the authentication is connected directly to the reader. The reader can communicate only with this specific chip. The chip itself receives the pictures, calculates the hash and stores the hash in its own non-volatile memory. The chip has only two api-calls: "Train" and 'Authenticate'.

With "Train", it would train on a users finger-print and return "DONE" or "NOT SUCCESSFUL". With "Authenticate", it would only return "ACK", or "NACK". I know, I know, the company building the chip would still be able to put in back-doors, etc, but at least this way the finger-print picture or hash would never leave the chip.

Also, best would be to open-source the chip code so that it can be verified. I know, it still doesn't GUARANTEE that the verified source is what is in the chip that is shipped but at least SOME security/privacy check would be in there..

This is going nuts (replying to own reply to own message):
If I was Apple, I would generate a completely new hash every time I recognize the finger print with a completely new salt. This way, the system could get better over time as well as protect the users privacy because the hash and the salt keeps changing every time...

Oh, one more thing: if I was Apple, I would also salt the hash with a device-specific (device-unique) random code in order to make sure that the Government cannot send me a list of hashes asking: "We want data from users with these hashes..." - and the device salt could be generated anew every time the device is restored...

Basically, he is the guy legally overseeing German Privacy Laws in the State of Hamburg. He is not a privacy expert. The only two guys in Germany I would listen to (maybe three guys) is the Privacy Commissioner of the State of Schleswig-Holstein, the Federal Privacy Commissioner and someone from Chaos Computer Club.

That being said, the question rather should be how the fingerprint scanner is implemented. If it generates a hash that is stored on the device and never stores the finger-print itself outside of RAM, I wouldn't have a problem with that.

The devil usually is in the detail - and in this case in the details of implementation. I would assume that Apple generates a hash code, stores it on the device and compares only hashes and never has a finger-print picture stored on the device (which would be better in any case). One might even consider storing up to 3, 5 or 10 hashes in order to have some heuristics.

Also, one wouldn't generate a has of the picture but rather the relationship of certain finger-print lines in order to not rely on a picture that might be different every time. But the line-relation is not so much different. I'm not an expert in biometrics, but I believe this is the same approach for face-recognition (certain specific face-points and their relationship to each other is analyzed, a hash generated and stored and next time compared against a new hash).

Being myself a German, I sometimes worry about German "alarmism". As Sigmund Freud said: "some times, a cigar is only really a cigar..."

I'm having problems understanding this. Can you explain, please?
Thanks

Feminism, Sexism, Machoism, ...ism, ...ism, ...ism...

I'm still searching for Humanism, believing that that would be the solution. But, alas, it seems I'm always searching in all the wrong places...

Yeah, I meant firmware - but somehow, in my messed-up mind (with regards to security/encryption discussion), they are all under the heading "BIOS" (in fact, the heading should be the other way around: everything should be under the heading "Firmware"....)

Mod up the parent!

Yes, that's actually my concern all the time. Of course, with open source, you could technically check the source of the system you are using. But then, you'd need to check every line of code, thinking exactly like the NSA (or what-not) in every piece of software you use, including the compiler you use to compile and the compiler compiler, etc, etc.

Additionally, you'd need to check the source of all the HW-components that come with their own BIOS, including the system's BIOS, networking chip's onboard software, and a lot more. Of course, you could reduce the number of checks if you would write your own code for encryption that sits between your keyboard/mouse, memory, etc - meaning, if you really want to sleep sound, you need to write your own encryption system end-to-end, i.e. from the first input (electricity flowing from .e.g keyboard) to the last output. Even then, I wouldn't be sure if I hadn't forgotten anything in-between...

Wow, a great documentary, thank you very much for the great YouTube link.

I was talking with my wife (in NYC) and saying: "You know what would be best for NYC? Having streetcars on every avenue and every second or third street. And then ban all private automobiles in Manhattan..." - I didn't know that it was similar to this idea in the 1920s until around 1950s... sad...

Why is that hyperbole? I used to work on HP machines a long time ago (when they were running some HP-owned BASIC) and I loved the natural scrolling. It took some time get used to used, but I preferred it over the "non-natural" on all other machines.

Autohide scrollbars is also nice to have, though I'm not religious about that one - scrollbars just use up precious screen estate. Especially when using two-finger scrolling on touch pads, I don't really need to see the scrollbars all the time.

No, not an Apple fanboy - there is enough to criticize and I usually criticize Apple a lot - but not for these features, that you can actually turn OFF.

And on another note: taxis (with their drivers) don't communicate traffic-data to each other. Self-driving cars could do that and optimize the route. Then, of course, if I could also personalize the route with things like "please use scenic route", "use fast route", "use a county road", etc - it would be perfect...

Kind'o - without the annoying driver(s) I have experienced for decades now... And also with the ability to drive cross-country, etc - the thing with Taxis is that they are way too expensive and about 50% of the drivers I met were either annoying or just plain unfriendly. My idea is something like "Car2Go", but self-driving and available across the country.

The one thing that unites all human beings, regardless of age, gender, religion, economic status or ethnic background, is that, deep down inside, we ALL believe that we are above average drivers. --- Item 12 on the list of "16 THINGS THAT IT TOOK ME OVER 50 YEARS TO LEARN - from Dave Barry, Nationally Syndicated Columnist (found on the Internet a loooong time ago).

In fact, I wouldn't call it only 29%, but rather already 29%.

The reason is that the discussion about driverless cars is so new/recent that I wouldn't even have expected that many people saying that they would consider buying a driverless car.

My dream transport-solution is: (a) not owning a car at all; (b) call a car anytime I need one; (c) getting driven (automatically) to any place I want; (d) I pay for the time I use the car and can leave it anywhere in the country (obviously, in a village/town/city or so).

If we had a system like that and everybody would use it, it could be the solution to most of our traffic problems, including congestion (cars can communicate information faster and react faster than humans), parking problems, and more. Most of the time, cars are just parked somewhere and standing idle anyway.

So, yes, count me in...

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke