On 28/02/2021 19:27, Steve Walker wrote:
On 28/02/2021 19:07, Fred wrote:
"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
On 28 Feb 2021 at 10:11:45 GMT, Fredxx wrote:
On 28/02/2021 10:03, Rod Speed wrote:
*Fredxx wrote
*Rod Speed wrote
*Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote
*One of the main issues about any on line financial services is
proving who you are. Increasingly complicated and often
inaccessible ways to prove you are a human and indeed the
account holder
*Bull**** with the best fingerprint and
*facial recognition on your phone.
*Some of us use desktops.
*I do too but net banking is much better done* on the
*phone for that reason and brian* has a very decent
*iphone which has the best fingerprint id around.
*Both of those techniques have weaknesses.
*Not with the best implementations they dont.
*Try changing your fingerprint after this:
*Don't need to, no fingerprint or facial data ever
*leaves the phone, the phone just tells the app
*that your fingerprint or face does match the
*data that never ever leaves the phone and
*isnt even available to someone who steals
*the phone or finds it either. All the phone
*ever does is say that the current fingerprint
*or face matches the very securely stored
*internal data. No one, not even the phone
*manufacturer ever gets to see it.
https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-defence-firms
You've missed the point that when you biometric data is compromised
facial and fingerprints are no longer secure, and tricky to get new
credentials.
*make the use so onerous that its easier over the telephone
quite often.
*Bull****.
*I have to use my phone to get a number to log into my account on
a desktop.
*You should be doing your banking on a very secure phone.
*While it will be quicker than making a call if I'm wearing a
headset I could still get on with things around me.
*You can get on much easier with the best phones.
*And dont try running some line about the cost of them,
*there are plenty of very secure decently priced phones
*that arent anything like the latest models.
I like big multi-monitors that have all the information at my
fingertips in view at the same time. A 5"x3" screen doesn't quite
hack it.
I also record my calls, so I need a rooted phone after Google closed
the recording facility on new phones. So another potential security
weakness kindly created by Google.
I gave up on the fingerprint stuff when I found that to get into the
phone took 1, 2, 3 or more attempts.
Never does on mine.
**** that. A little bit longer to type in the
code but it takes the same amount of time, every time, and it works,
every time.
So does the fingerprint on mine.
You just need a well designed phone.
Mine works fine most of the time, but when I have been doing DIY and
have had glue, plaster, mortar, concrete or things like that on my
fingers, the fingerprint reader won't work for days.
I simply don't bother with passwords at all. I wouldn't use an
inherently insecure device like a mobile phone for anything important.
it's there to receive texts from couriers, banks the NHS and so on.
Likewise the gmail account it insists on is never used for anything
private and whatever zoom/whatsapp/skype goes on is so boringly
uninteresting even to me, let alone GCHQ, that I really don't care who
reads it.
Mobile phones are toys. Ultimate consumerCrap. Mine doesnt respond to
its touchscreen half the time except when I would rather it didnt.
Ergonomically it is a total disaster., Whoever thought of putting input
where you cannot actually avoid getting fingers while holding the device?
Anyone doing anything important with a phone is a ****ing idiot
--
There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isnt true; the
other is to refuse to believe what is true.
Soren Kierkegaard