NODE 45d2b228Re: anonymous age credentials, sharing of
"E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>Sat, 17 Feb 1996 09:13:00 +0800
From: IN%"samman-ben@CS.YALE.EDU" "Rev. Ben" 15-FEB-1996 20:05:34.89
>The only REAL way of authentication is biometrics. Anything else can be
>swapped. But if you amputate someone's hand or retinas then they won't
>work(check for things like blood flow, etc.)
Actually, a simulation ought to work pretty well at fooling most extant
devices, and any devices likely to be developed soon. Now, fooling the guards
watching you at a secure site may be a problem (a hand up your sleeve?), as
may getting someone else's biometric information in the first place. The
latter gets into the area of cryptography since whoever has such information
(other than the original possessor) is likely to hash it anyway.
-Allen
NODE 546dc2bbRe: anonymous age credentials, sharing of
watson@tds.comSun, 18 Feb 1996 16:34:33 +0800
Did anybody see the movie Demolition Man? Biometrics were "hacked"
there. I guess it's hard to be sure, but it seems something in your
brain is tougher to extract than a finger or an eyeball. The texts say a
combination is a good idea.
On Fri, 16 Feb 1996, E. ALLEN SMITH
wrote:
> From: IN%"samman-ben@CS.YALE.EDU" "Rev. Ben" 15-FEB-1996 20:05:34.89
>
> >The only REAL way of authentication is biometrics. Anything else can be
> >swapped. But if you amputate someone's hand or retinas then they won't
> >work(check for things like blood flow, etc.)
>
> Actually, a simulation ought to work pretty well at fooling most extant
> devices, and any devices likely to be developed soon. Now, fooling the guards
> watching you at a secure site may be a problem (a hand up your sleeve?), as
> may getting someone else's biometric information in the first place. The
> latter gets into the area of cryptography since whoever has such information
> (other than the original possessor) is likely to hash it anyway.
> -Allen
>