Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 13th Sep 2017 21:56 UTC
Privacy, Security, Encryption

If you value the security of your data - your email, social media accounts, family photos, the history of every place you've ever been with your phone - then I recommend against using biometric identification.

Instead, use a passcode to unlock your phone.

Can't argue with that - especially in place where law enforcement often takes a... Liberal approach to detainees.

Thread beginning with comment 648832
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Well ...
by Alfman on Thu 14th Sep 2017 03:40 UTC in reply to "Well ..."
Alfman
Member since:
2011-01-28

WorknMan,

I'm not one of those people who say, 'If you have nothing to fear, you have nothing to hide', but I do think a lot of people are too goddamn paranoid. Of course, some people have good reason to be, but I suspect most people don't.


It's not about paranoia or guilt, IMHO. Instead it is about principals and whether you value our rights as individuals that our forefathers granted us in the constitution.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Well ...
by ilovebeer on Thu 14th Sep 2017 14:39 in reply to "RE: Well ..."
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

That's where I side on this issue. To me it's 100% principle and rights. There has to be a line drawn between the people and those who are supposed to `serve & protect` us. Law enforcement should never have absolute power or control to invade what's most private and sensitive unless there's true reasonable cause. Human beings simply don't do well when privacy is absent. I could never justify police abuse of power by saying `if you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't have a problem with it`. Yes, you should have a problem with it! A HUGE one! That kind of stuff is the exact opposite of what a democratic society is supposed to be.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Well ...
by WorknMan on Thu 14th Sep 2017 22:02 in reply to "RE: Well ..."
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

It's not about paranoia or guilt, IMHO. Instead it is about principals and whether you value our rights as individuals that our forefathers granted us in the constitution.


So, assuming you don't have anything on your phone that might get you in trouble, you're going to go through the inconvenience of using a pin instead of a fingerprint, because... fuck the police? Please help me make sense out of that.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Well ...
by Alfman on Fri 15th Sep 2017 07:01 in reply to "RE[2]: Well ..."
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

WorknMan,

So, assuming you don't have anything on your phone that might get you in trouble, you're going to go through the inconvenience of using a pin instead of a fingerprint, because... f--k the police? Please help me make sense out of that.


I was responding to your original post where you were implying that only guilty people have a good reason to be against the intrusions. Just because you don't care, that doesn't mean others don't or shouldn't care. As I said before, many people object on principal, even if the police wouldn't find anything.

As far as your next point, people can chose for themselves what they do and why. Just keep in mind lax security doesn't just benefit the police, it also benefits criminals. I hope people are able to make an informed decision based on realistic threat models. Unfortunately vendors (including apple) are sometimes known to mislead users by claiming their security is better than it really is - they're not really doing their customers any favors when they exaggerate because it is not going to fool the hackers!

Edited 2017-09-15 07:08 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4