On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 02:32, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > An even better security guideline is "something you are" -- so > should we not spring for retinal scanners/fingerprint readers/other > buiometrics? I mean, we _are_ talking about other peoples money. :P
Biometric scans are a bad idea. The technology is unreliable, and I'd rather have someone steal my wallet to get a smart-card than try to steal an eye or a finger... > > GPG smart-cards are entering the market. If GPG is crackable then > > we have lost regardless. If GPG is secure then GPG smart-cards will > > do as long as they are not stolen. Having revokation proceedures > > for stolen cards and DD's reliable enough to follow them should deal > > with this. > > Laptops with biometric print readers are supposed to be around > the horizon as well. Current fingerprint readers have been shown to be very unreliable. Both false-positives and false-negatives are big problems. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page