My comment was in reply to another saying a bad guy can force you to put your finger on the unlock sensor. There is no equivalent for pins.
They can threaten, yes, and you can give into that threat. Yes, that would be against your will, but it still requires you to acquiesce or cooperate was my point. The can’t get the pin without you giving it.
Yeah, and if you’re being robbed they’ll probably fuck you up pretty badly if you don’t. While not mind readers, they don’t have to be.
In most cases anyone who wants to beat your pin will just watch you unlock your phone. They don’t need to see the exact numbers: you can pick most of it up just based on relative finger motion. Looking at screen smudges gives another set of hints that are pretty trivial to extract.
If your goal is to keep it from the police, your best bet is to use an entirely different system than rely on your phones lock screen.
I can’t think of a scenario where I’m thinking both “biometrics are insufficient to safeguard this data” and “it’s appropriate to keep this data on my telephone”.
You aren’t wrong, but this discussion is mostly about edge cases. The average person, yea, they won’t have anything that is end of their world if a bad guy accesses it. But, that does mean there aren’t many phones that contain significantly more important data than you have.
Given we’re in a thread about biometrics being the opposite of privacy and security, it really does seem relevant to me that the threat model where they would be insufficient and the one where that would matter is basically empty.
If your thought process is “I need to protect this from the police and a determined or sophisticated criminal, but I can’t be bothered to use anything more than my lock screen on my phone”… Well, you’re already starting from a pretty bad place.
My comment was in reply to another saying a bad guy can force you to put your finger on the unlock sensor. There is no equivalent for pins.
They can threaten, yes, and you can give into that threat. Yes, that would be against your will, but it still requires you to acquiesce or cooperate was my point. The can’t get the pin without you giving it.
Yeah, and if you’re being robbed they’ll probably fuck you up pretty badly if you don’t. While not mind readers, they don’t have to be.
In most cases anyone who wants to beat your pin will just watch you unlock your phone. They don’t need to see the exact numbers: you can pick most of it up just based on relative finger motion. Looking at screen smudges gives another set of hints that are pretty trivial to extract.
If your goal is to keep it from the police, your best bet is to use an entirely different system than rely on your phones lock screen.
I can’t think of a scenario where I’m thinking both “biometrics are insufficient to safeguard this data” and “it’s appropriate to keep this data on my telephone”.
You aren’t wrong, but this discussion is mostly about edge cases. The average person, yea, they won’t have anything that is end of their world if a bad guy accesses it. But, that does mean there aren’t many phones that contain significantly more important data than you have.
Given we’re in a thread about biometrics being the opposite of privacy and security, it really does seem relevant to me that the threat model where they would be insufficient and the one where that would matter is basically empty.
If your thought process is “I need to protect this from the police and a determined or sophisticated criminal, but I can’t be bothered to use anything more than my lock screen on my phone”… Well, you’re already starting from a pretty bad place.
Nothing in that reply is even close to anything I’ve said. Don’t waste my time with stupidity or strawmen.