Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Wednesday May 24 2023, @04:19PM   Printer-friendly

Someone who looks a lot like you could also unlock it, says Which?

Samsung, Oppo and Nokia are among a range of Android phone makers with facial recognition scanning tech that can be "easily duped" by a printed 2D photo, according to tests undertaken by campaign group Which?

Resident techies that put a range of phones and brands through their paces (see box below) said the findings were of concern as biometric tech is often billed as one of the most secure ways to unlock a handset.

Of the 48 phones Which? sent to labs for testing, 19 could be spoofed with photos and "worryingly" these were "not even particularly high resolution and were printed on a standard office printer on normal, rather than photo, paper."

The vast majority of the phones that failed the simple biometric test were, unsurprisingly, low to mid-range in price, though Which? claimed there were exceptions, including the Xiaomi 13 and the Motorola Razr.

Of the phones that Which? reckons could be fooled, seven were made by Xiaomi, four came from Motorola, while two came from each of Nokia, Oppo and Samsung. One model made by Honor and another by Vivo was also found to be exploitable.

Under Android's requirements, phone makers must ensure devices and software are "Android compatible," which includes how often device security can be spoofed. Class 3 systems must not be duped more than 7 percent of the time, and Class 1 system are least secure, with a spot rate of 20 percent of the time to more.

Which? voiced worries that scammers could exploit the weakness to – for example – access Google Wallet to make payments to a limited value (£45 in the UK, about $56) without needing to unlock their phone. For larger transactions, Google asks users to use a Class 3 biometric lock, Which? said.


Original Submission

 
This discussion was created by janrinok (52) for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Zinho on Thursday May 25 2023, @12:28PM (2 children)

    by Zinho (759) on Thursday May 25 2023, @12:28PM (#1308094)

    Odd that we have protections for self-incrimination by speech, but not by physical touch.

    Amen, brother!
    I'm definitely not advocating for the status quo, just pointing it out. I think it's strange, too, doubly so when tech companies/news media actively campaign to make us feel safer becoming vulnerable to such searches.

    BTW, what's up with us both getting flamebait mods on this thread? Some pro-police modder got his feelings hurt over having the truth pointed out?

    Hey, modboy, don't hate, participate: post a reply, please. I want to hear what you have to say.

    --
    "Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=1, Interesting=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 3, Touché) by JoeMerchant on Thursday May 25 2023, @12:34PM

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Thursday May 25 2023, @12:34PM (#1308095)

    Modboy is a rare Silent Majority member. The common ones are neither, but at least Modboy is almost silent.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
  • (Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday May 25 2023, @03:27PM

    by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Thursday May 25 2023, @03:27PM (#1308128) Journal

    It is just our resident grumpy old man, I least I am assuming he is old. The moderations tend to get corrected over the course of discussion.