In 2013 a CCC member broke TouchID access within a few hours after release of the IPhone. All needed was a photograph of the fingerprint on a glass surface. https://www.ccc.de/en/updates/2013/ccc-breaks-apple-touchid
Same method worked on the Iphone 6, as Apple hasn't changed a thing. Biometry is fundamentally broken.
And wood glue! Looks like that method proved unreliable, so they expanded it:
"To create the mold, the mask is then used to expose the fingerprint structure on photo-senistive PCB material. The PCB material is then developed, etched and cleaned. After this process, the mold is ready. A thin coat of graphite spray is applied to ensure an improved capacitive response. This also makes it easier to remove the fake fingerprint. Finally a thin film of white wood glue is smeared into the mold. After the glue cures the new fake fingerprint is ready for use."
People reported that pet's pawns work.
How is the iris scanner on Microsoft phones in comparison?
AFAIK CCC never had a proof of concept of a real world usage of this. They needed access the original finger.
That isn't to say it's not possible but it is a pretty major asterisk.
Can't find the reference right now, but somebody's gotta remember this, it was when the UK was considering using biometric data as IDs.
https://www.ccc.de/updates/2008/schaubles-finger (in German)
Which, imo, isn't much different conditions tbh (i.e. not representative of the real world)
There's no need to get a perfect copy.
"fingerprints are usernames, not passwords" is the standard advice I've read.
It's actually the same guy as with the S8, aka Starbug.
They also managed to get the fingerprint of a politician via a high resolution picture taken at a speech. (Also a phone PIN via eye reflection captured by the front camera.)
Yes, hopefully he will give another talk at 34C3. Very entertaining guy too!
The use of biometrics on mobile devices somewhat mix this, with the assumption that if some user was authenticated within a certain time frame (via a pin or some other knowledge bound check), a simple id is enough to extend that authentication.
Authorization is the counterpart to Authentication: authentication proves who you are (with passwords/tokens/biometrics aka something you know/have/are), authorization controls what you can do (with permissions/ACLs/roles/etc.)
To put it another way, the bouncer at a club checks your photo ID to see that you match it (authentication via something you are), then uses it to see if you can enter (authorization by checking your birthdate against a cut-off/name against a guestlist).
Firstly, any biometric technique can be beaten. Against a known, committed foe, it is almost impossible to defend with surety. And for that matter, who can't obtain the pin code of any other user given a short amount of time and focused attention? The notion that "if someone takes an IR high resolution, close photo of your iris they can defeat your security" is asinine given that the same people could obtain your pin in a million and one ways.
These mechanisms are to induce users to use some security, and the primary defense is against lost or stolen phones, making it convenient enough that it isn't disabled.
Secondly, how did this somehow turn into yet another Royal Apple spiel? Aside from the easy beatability of the Apple fingerprint sensor, why wouldn't you compare the fingerprint sensor on a Samsung?
There are commercial security products that regularly perform "IR high resolution" iris scans from several meters away and require no cooperation from the target. Stanley CSS sold one that sat on top of a doorway over five years ago, their product literature says that you need to look at it - but having demoed it myself, I can say that is not true.
Until CCC approves your CSS I will consider it insecure.
On paper it looks awful, but everything this phone does works 100% of the time quickly and without stuttering or failing.
Before I had a Motorola. It was much better. I will not buy another Samsung.
But that should be expected, as it's from Google
But my point was more that on paper it doesn't look like much. It doesn't have waterproofing, it's not "best in class" in anything except the camera, it runs software which has less "on paper" features than other brands, it doesn't have an SD card or removable battery, etc...
But when you actually go to use it, it's a night and day difference between it and other devices.
So when the iPhone gets a fingerprint sensor that saves only a hash of the actual data in a special enclave of a custom chip, Samsung responds with an iris scanner that saves an image of the iris as a world-readable jpeg in your home directory.
Thus, their marketing material can claim feature-parity (or even exceed Apple). But it never seems like they actually care.
It's not like Apple doesn't run into similar problems (not sure if the fingerprint sensor has been defeated–it's a bad idea for 5th amendment reasons in any case). But at least they do the minimum in trying.