Apple possibly removing TouchID from next iPhones.

>>61210674
The botnet already has your fingerprints, now it wants your face

unlikely desu

very unlikely, most likely will be used in conjunction. they'd be fucking dumb to do such a move.

> inb4 "courage" got rid of the 1/4 headphone jack

>>61210674
Would this be cheaper to implement over a fingerprint scanner? That's the only reason I'd ever see for doing it. If it's more expensive, then it's a pointless gimmick because Finger ID already works fine. Only downside is having to occasional clean the senors when they inevitably get covered in your gross oil and shit and become more inaccurate.

Personally I could see face ID becoming popular for the sake of consistency over touch, but I'm sure the camera sensors needed are more expensive than touch IDs.

>>61211046
Probably yes since the camera is already used for other things so the finger scan could be deleted

>>61210674
Meh. "TouchID" (it's just a fucking fingerprint scanner, why do they need their own brandname for it?) has been successfully hacked for years already anyway.

See the Chaos Computer Club. It's literally gelatin and graphite, all you need is jelly and pencils to defeat "TouchID".

>>61211085
>Meh. "TouchID" (it's just a fucking fingerprint scanner, why do they need their own brandname for it?) has been successfully hacked for years already anyway.

sorry but that's fake news

>>61211085
wtf are you talking about? it hasn't. source or kys

>>61211094
>>61211117
TouchID broken since 2013
https://www.ccc.de/en/updates/2013/ccc-breaks-apple-touchid

>>61210674
>steal celebrity's iPad
>go to wax museum
>unlock and authorize payments

Perfect.

>>61211119
>he thinks no changes have been made since 2013
>doesn't realize there's a 2nd generation of touchid

try again!

>we have their fingerprints, now we just need to match them to a face

>>61211419
Once broken, always broken shitter.

>>61211540
t. pajeet

File: 1498958169797.jpg (48KB, 523x543px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 523x543px

>>61211046
>Personally I could see face ID becoming popular for the sake of consistency over touch
>there are people who unironically willingly sign over their biometric data to skynet

Dumb fuck is an understatement.

>>61210999
>>61211010
I agree that using these two technologies together would probably give the best utility but from reports Apple plans to eliminate the bottom bezel and home button. They've been trying to utilize Touch ID underneath the screen but supposedly the yields aren't good.

>>61211556
convenience trumps common sense

Stop listening to fake news, it's highly unlikely for Apple to remove touchID alltogether, because not only it's implemented too far in iOS, it would be inconvenient af to have to hold the phone to your face everytime you want to unlock, or you want to make a payment. They know this.

Also, it will likely be implemented into the screen
>it can't be on the back, we've all seen the case mockups
>it can't be on the apple logo, since they didn't tell the case manufacturers to avoid covering it
>it can't be on the power button, see why the xperia z5 didn't ship with a fingerprint scanner in the US

More likely to use infrared through glass for touch id

These 8 leaks are the worst design ever fuck. Apple is all set to beat lagdroids they just need a specced up iPhone 7 with a nice screen to rival s8. Now they are falling for all the memes and reinventing shit that didn't need reinventing, what are they microsoft?

>>61211669
I mostly agree but two things concern me:
1. Rumors based on leaks from suppliers are saying that Apple is going to a bezel less OLED display. These same rumors are saying that Apple's suppliers are having trouble with the yields using the under screen Touch ID tech.
2. No one has been able to reliably develop under display finger print sensors yet.

I wouldn't buy it without TouchID.
Facial recognition is easier to hack because it's easier for a hacker to get a photo of you than a fingerprint.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/3/31/15136226/samsung-galaxy-s8-face-scan-security

>>61211866
The iphone 8 will have a 3d sensor tho

>>61211769
I don't think they would have a reason to replace touchid with something less convenient.

>>61211961
Again, I agree. Either these leaks are wrong, which would be surprising since they have been somewhat accurate in the past, or Apple has gone full retard.

File: 1287725098178.png (58KB, 344x345px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 344x345px

>>61211764
most rumors center on Apple simultaneously releasing the 7S alongside the 8. It seems weird as fuck to me to release both numbers at the same time, the only other naming convention I could imagine is 'Pro' since that exists in all their other product lines.

>>61211999
I wouldn't get too caught up on the naming conventions, I doubt we will see a 7s/7s Plus released alongside something called the iPhone 8. They will probably call it something different.

I do think all three of these phones will come out relatively close to the same time. From the rumors the OLED iPhone(what many call the iPhone 8) is going to be more expensive, partly because Apple can't produce them in enough quantity to meet the usual demand.

>>61211085
TouchID uses the secure enclave, most fingerprint sensor setups just store a hash on eMMC

Wouldn't it have to use some form of LIDAR?
Those are only just becoming justifiable in cars, no way the tech and shrunk enough to go in a phone yet

File: iphone 7 back.jpg (197KB, 1600x1068px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 1600x1068px

This is the order they should try to solve the problem because facial recognition will always get cracked.

>put the fingerprint reader under the display
>put the fingerprint reader on the back using the Apple logo as the reader
>put the fingerprint reader on the power button
>or skip iPhone 8 and make a iPhone 7s until they can figure it out.

>>61210674
Face ID is still shit. Applel wouldn't go for a half assed solution with their biggest product.

>>61212299
Actually a 7s/7s Plus and releasing iPhone 8 with shitty availability wouldn't be that outlandish. They could copy GPU makers with a paper launch of their best product and count on people going for cheaper option to ease up the demand at start.

>>61214083
Not releasing a new iPhone would disappoint the people too much. Financially they could easy handle it but it'd be a huge hit to their reputation, which they value too much to risk it.

>>61211999
Or simply calling 8 "iPhone".

At some point adding a higher number looks fucking silly.

>>61211556
Since when does a stop sign the same as a yield sign?

>>61214083

>>put the fingerprint reader on the back using the Apple logo as the reader

This is logistically and technically fucking retarded and you are 14.

>>61216079
Whut

File: phone fingerprint back.jpg (63KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 800x600px

>>61216127
Why? There are plenty of smartphones with fingerprint readers on the back, the only thing i'm not certain is if they can make it work in the shaped of the Apple logo.

>>61214193
Not so much when you hit ten you can just switch to Roman Numerals, call it the X and start a new name/number scheme

>>61216079
When people stop to squint at it because they have no idea what it is or what it means

This is a little scary, and I'll tell you why. First, let me say that there's no way they're getting rid of TouchID. Reports don't support this, patents don't support this, the markets don't support this, and logic doesn't support this. But if they are also including facial recognition as another factor, there's a very good question of "why?"

Facial recognition is shit for individualization. Already, one in fifty people could pick up your phone and have their fingerprints break through your touch ID due to the 2%~ false accept rates. Facial recognition is even worse; there's a high intra-class variation, so as you get older, or sleepier, or you change your makeup or your hair, your phone isn't going to be able to recognize you as well - more false rejections. And it has a low inter-class variation, so twins obviously have high false accept rates, but also even with non-relatives the false accept rates are pretty dangerous due to low individualization powers.

The scary part is when this is combined with fingerprints. Facial recognition sucks for one-to-one verification because it has low powers of individualization, and fingerprints suck at one-to-many identification because of the overhead involved in searching through large databases for a fingerprint match. Combined in a multi-modal biometric system, however, facial recognition (because it requires substantially less processing) can be used to narrow down a database quickly and efficiently, using fingerprints to make a one-to-many identification from the remaining pool of possible matches.

So the question becomes, why is Apple developing a system that would be very good for making one-to-many identification matches on individuals, but fails at being any better at one-to-one verification, which is what they purport the biometrics are being used for?

They won't remove it. Fingerprint scanner are extremely useful and they wouldn't replace it with something as ridiculous as an "iris" scanner.

>>61216986
Iris scanning works pretty well. Higher FRR than fingerprints, but much lower FAR (more secure). And it doesn't require touch.

>>61210674
>Niggers trying to unlock their welfare phones in the dark
>This gets called racist
Can't wait.

>>61217358
You do realize that the reason facial recognition doesn't work well on blacks and other minorities has very little to do with skin pigment, right? The majority of the training data for these applications comes from their engineers. Facial recognition's inability to work on minorities is a socioeconomic issue, not a physical limitation of the technology.

>>61217530
>low light performance is actually racist

havin a chuckel m8

>>61217530

It uses infrared you fucking dumb nigger. A Nubian can use it in a black hole and it'll still work.

>>61217530
Kudos to whipping a huffington post article out of your ass like that, commie, let me know how that Zyklon B tastes.

>>61210985
came here to post this

File: trollmoot.png (50KB, 222x186px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 222x186px

>stacey use her face to unlock her daddyphone
>print out HQ photo of stacey from normiebook
>use it to log into stacey's daddyphone
>now have stacey's nudes

File: chadthunder.jpg (60KB, 600x645px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 600x645px

>>61217712
>what are you doing with my girlfriends nudes you little twerp?

>>61216986
They will just get rid of the clicky button. It will just be a smooth area to put your finger and it will scan it. The button itself will be like whats been on most $10 androids for years now and Apple will claim to invent the home button. Just watch and see.

Biometric + PIN.
You need 2-factors.

>>61211182
or just use a printed picture from the celebrity

>>61217801
deleting them and uploading my nudes instead

>>61216127
Why? You can unlock it with one hand while holding it. My Redmi 4 has it. The disadvantage is you can't unlock it while it's laying on a table. Each way has its pros and cons, but it's not fair to declare one as superior.

>>61217530
>and here is my proof for this bold statement:

>>61218098
Are you genuinely retarded?

>>61218243
Not everyone knows they use infrared. You're much smarter than everyone else, but there's no need for name-calling.

A combination of 3d facial recognition and the touchscreen fingerprint recognizement qualcomm showed off

wewlads the future is here fingerprint/face sensors in every office now

File: REAL-f mask.jpg (576KB, 818x1690px) Image search: [Google]

576KB, 818x1690px

>>61211924
>>61218267
Anything can be cracked, you can now make a 3D printed face easily.
Faces are easier to obtain than fingerprints.

>>61217635
I think you're replying to the wrong person, friend.

>>61217643
>Kudos to whipping a huffington post article out of your ass like that, commie
Actually, I'm an active researcher who works in the field, and my face is used as biometric training data.

>let me know how that Zyklon B tastes.
Dude, I'm Welsh.

>>61218879
Iris, fingerprint, and facial recognition systems all have ways to detect for "liveness" (i.e. a severed finger or 3D printed face won't work) and prosthetics (i.e. good iris systems recognize when the user is wearing contacts).

>anything can be cracked
Not without an infinite amount of time and resources. Post-quantum cryptography can be achieved with several existing cryptographic systems by simply doubling the key size. Technology cannot win a race against cryptography.

>>61210674
I eagerly await appledrones defending it as a good thing.
>You wanted decent bezels so they had to remove it, and they can't put it on the back because that's where the logo is
>By doing this they save 0.3 grams
>Just use the face recognition, it works great unless you're black or wearing glasses.
>I don't have this problem because my iphone unlocks when it's near my apple watch ;^)

>>61221148
>using the smiley with a carat nose

>>61210674
That's fucking dumb because I have a Samsung S4 and it has an option to read your face to unlock the phone. I don't use it but holy fuck apple you suck even more now.

>2017
>multi stage locks aren't the norm
seriously though why the fuck can't I use my finger print, face, smartwatch near, and a pin? The tech is there right now but yet nearly all systems only allow one option (and at most that option + pin).

Fuckin garbo mang

>>61211769
So they'll put the fingerprint sensor on the back, like most android phones. Problem solved.

>>61221566
What I want is fingerprint + simple gesture to get around the "it's on your person not in your mind so you're forced to give it up" laws.

>>61221640
So much more could be done so easily so people are actually secure but they're lazy as fuck and now millions of people are relying on fingerprints almost exclusively when they should be used as usernames not passwords.

>>61210674
Thanks Tim, please remove it from Macbook Pro's next.

If this is true, I bet they failed to embed a fingerprinting reader in a screen, so they don't want to place it anywhere else because of "mahh design".

It would be yet another case of design trumping features at Apple.

>>61210674
Nobody remembers how many of these Apple pre-release rumors are proved wrong; that's why these guys get paid very well to bulshit us again the next year.

I've heard from one of Apples employees that it's going to be lightning fast and authenticate in just .126 seconds or something along the lines. He also claimed that it would work with the phone laying flat on a table infront of you as well.

So if this is all true I believe that it's mostly good. You just take up the phone and it will turn on the screen automatically and at the same time authenticate. My only concern is the security. It's claimed to be an Iris scanner, and I've seen people tricking the system with a 2D photo.

>>61211531
Of course. We're monitored by the Apple Intelligence Agency.

>>61211419
biometrics are a poor form of authentication, and fingerprints are the worst form of biometric.

but that doesn't mean touchid and the android equivalent don't perform adequately for the majority of users.

protip: don't store nuclear launch codes on your phone

>>61211182
>Steal

Nigger.

>Sensor under the glass tech not ready this for this year
>Place it on the back and will look like regression and mess with the aesthetics

Only thing I can see them doing is implementing the sensor in the apple logo on the back then do it under the glass next year

>>61211085
TouchID, retina, touchbar etc
Apple products are sold with buzz words for existing technology
Everything else is sold with specifications and whatever RGB gamer tripe for pro gamerz is floating around

Retina = 375+ PPI or some shit (if your phone has 1080p you have a "retina display"
TouchID = fingerprint scanner
Touchbar = secondary screen

The more colourful and appealing a toy is the more likely the child will want it

fucking good. pain in the ass when the slightest tear to the home button renders the touch ID useless. itll be great for repair shops and customers alike.

>>61223600
>less business is good for repair shops

>>61210674
I always wonder if Apple will go back and realize something that they did was a bad idea.

I hope they realize:
The touch bar was a mistake
Removing the headphone jack isn't necessary
Having a black and white mentality when it comes to new technology isn't the best mentality
Making things thinner doesn't really matter when your device is extremely large in the first place

I just want a new macbook with 2 USB As and 2 USB Cs without a Touchbar and with decent battery life t.bh

>>61210985
Shmeks

>>61211085
>it's just a fucking fingerprint scanner, why do they need their own brandname for it?
so they can reference it as a differentiating feature compared to the iPhone 5, etc...

take a deep breath when you're about to bitch about apple shit. lots of the stuff they do is fucking retarded, but is this actually one of them? because this isn't the ground i would plant my flag on to point out how bullshit apple is.