Have Your Fingerprints Read From 6 Meters Away 122
First time accepted submitter Burdell writes "A new startup has technology to read fingerprints from up to 6 meters away. IDair currently sells to the military, but they are beta testing it with a chain of 24-hour fitness centers that want to restrict sharing of access cards. IDair also wants to sell this to retail stores and credit card companies as a replacement for physical cards. Lee Tien from the EFF notes that the security of such fingerprint databases is a privacy concern."
Since the last time this technology was mentioned more than a year ago, it seems that the claimed range for reading has tripled, and the fingerprint reader business has been spun off from the company at which development started.
Yeah... (Score:2)
Re:Yeah... (Score:5, Funny)
I don't know about fingerprints at 6 meters away, but if they come up with a miniature portable through the clothes scanner (ALA TSA) that can scan people from 6 meters away, I'll be happy to take it through a chain of 24-hour fitness centers to beta test it for them.
Gloves (Score:5, Interesting)
So are we going back to the habit of wearing silk gloves all the time now? I wouldn't mind that.
Re:Gloves (Score:5, Funny)
So are we going back to the habit of wearing silk gloves all the time now? I wouldn't mind that.
Silk gloves for fingerprints, beekeeper suit so as to not shed DNA in the wrong place, mask to obscure facial recognition and a wonky shoes to evade gait detection... Michael Jackson may have been sent from the future.
Re: (Score:2)
So are we going back to the habit of wearing silk gloves all the time now? I wouldn't mind that.
Silk gloves for fingerprints, beekeeper suit so as to not shed DNA in the wrong place, mask to obscure facial recognition and a wonky shoes to evade gait detection... Michael Jackson may have been sent from the future.
Note to self from the future: invest in stealth casual wear.
Re: (Score:3)
Just have a couple of IR-emitting LEDs on your person. The cameras get flooded, eyeballs can't tell the difference.
Hoods (Score:2)
Just have a couple of IR-emitting LEDs on your person. The cameras get flooded, eyeballs can't tell the difference.
In some states (such as Virginia) it is a felony to hide your face in public (e.g. with a mask or a veil).
http://law.justia.com/codes/virginia/2006/toc1802000/18.2-422.html
I predict there will be a federal law soon, saying the same thing about IR lighting your face.
Absolutely not ... (Score:5, Insightful)
If a gym, retail store, or credit card company ask for my finger prints, they will get told in no uncertain terms to politely go fsck themselves.
Not happening.
If you aint law enforcement, don't even bother asking.
Re:Absolutely not ... (Score:5, Insightful)
If you aint law enforcement, don't even bother asking.
s/law enforcment/law enforcement with a valid warrant/
Re:Absolutely not ... (Score:5, Insightful)
They don't need a warrant. They just need to arrest you. If you don't think they have a valid reason to arrest you and don't comply then resisting arrest becomes their reason.
You can sue them later, but good luck with that and with getting those prints out of the system.
Re: (Score:3)
No, they can arrest you for any reason whatsoever. They can't charge you with a crime without a reason, but that doesn't stop them from arresting you. If the police arrest you and the prosecutor declines to file charges, they must release you, but you don't get your 24 hours or your fingerprint records back.
I always wonder... (Score:1)
When I hear stories about people who've been arrested without any valid legal reason, I can't help but wonder "If that's illegal arrest, the cop can't - by definition - be acting in the legal duty of a police officer so it's pretty much a kidnap... what would SCOTUS say if someone would invoke their right to defend themselves and 2nd amendment against illegal arrest?". It sound like something that would - some time during the last few centuries - have occurred. So, what happened?
Re:I always wonder... (Score:4, Insightful)
what would SCOTUS say if someone would invoke their right to defend themselves and 2nd amendment against illegal arrest?".
It would never get to SCOTUS. The police would shoot you dead on the spot.
Re: (Score:2)
what would SCOTUS say if someone would invoke their right to defend themselves and 2nd amendment against illegal arrest?".
It would never get to SCOTUS. The police would shoot you dead on the spot.
Most likely on several spots.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Absolutely not ... (Score:5, Informative)
Take it from someone who has actual experience as a law enforcement officer(me), probable cause must exist to effect a legal arrest. The only side note to that is that "Reasonable, Articulable Suspicion"(RAS, based off of experience and other factors, which one must be able to articulate) must exist to initiate a "Terry Frisk"(Also covered as "Terry Stop"), per Terry v Ohio. In that ruling, there must be RAS that a crime is about to be committed, is being committed, or has just been committed. Even then, an arrest can only be made when probable cause is discovered; RAS only provides an officer the authority to initiate a "detention".
I was trained, as well as thousands of other officers, that illegal arrest(which are those that lack probable cause) can be resisted with any force necessary(i.e. the minimum needed), up to and including deadly force. That means that, if a police officer comes up to me, having committed no crime and no probable cause existing to the contrary, and attempts to place me under arrest(cessation of free movement), I may use force to resist such an arrest. Should the officer give me no other alternative, either by drawing his or her firearm or using an instrument that could cause great bodily harm or death, I have the option of using deadly force(a firearm, a ball bat, my new karate death move, or whatever) to resist the illegal arrest.
A word of caution: You had better know that you are in the right. If you are wrong and there was evidence that provides probable cause for an arrest, you have just committed numerous crimes. That and you will have a large body of law enforcement officers out to "cease your free movement".
Re: (Score:3)
I would like to add that an illegal arrest is covered under Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242. If two or more officers are involved, a Section 241 could be brought against the officers as well. That will earn the officer(s) quite a few years in a nice US Government establishment.
Re: (Score:2)
That will earn the officer(s) quite a few years in a nice US Government establishment.
Their home, on full pay, while they're "suspended pending investigation"?
Re: (Score:3)
Take it from someone who has actual experience as a law enforcement officer(me), probable cause must exist to effect a legal arrest.
In theory, yes. In practice, it's trivial for the cop to make up probable cause, such as assaulting the officers boot with your face. And if the dash cam doesn't support that charge, oops we lost the footage!
Re: (Score:2)
That's why they have the Blue Wall of Silence. Any good cop who turns in a bad cop will find himself outcast and unable to rely on backup when needed. So cops cover for each others criminal activities, and we are unable to get any actual statistics as to law breaking by law enforcement.
Re: (Score:2)
Has your state trooper brother ever let a speeding off duty cop go because of "professional courtesy"? If so, then he's a corrupt cop. If they do it for speeding tickets, why not assault?
I happen to be an white male adult, so I get by without a lot of hassle from police. But around here, police auditors get fired [omaha.com] for doing their job. And police officers flagrantly break the law [kmtv.com] without even getting charged for it. And internal review [omaha.com] boards are held in secret where no one can witness the whitewashing.
F
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Absolutely not ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Because never in all of history has someone in America been arrested without good reason. And certainly no one has ever been charged with "resisting arrest" and nothing else.
For example:
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_13686438 [mercurynews.com]
http://articles.philly.com/2010-06-29/news/24962922_1_wawa-officers-civilians [philly.com]
And your word of caution. No it doesn't matter if you are right. If I shoot a cop who was trying to arrest me without valid cause, the fact that he didn't have a valid cause isn't going to stop the "large body of law enforcement officers out to cease my free movement". Just look at the cases of the non-knock warrant being served on the wrong house and the people inside doing what you say and getting shot because they dared defend themselves.
For example:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18328267/ [msn.com]
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=95475 [go.com]
Re: (Score:3)
The cop doesn't have to tell you why he's arresting you before he cuffs you. So catch-22, you have no proof that he doesn't have probable cause.
Re: (Score:2)
illegal arrest can be resisted with any force necessary
I really would like to know how many times this has successfully been used with success (meaning either the cops backed off or in the trial that certainly followed). Otherwise it seems like one of those purely theoretical points of law that are one never see in real use.
Re: (Score:3)
You're expecting the legal system to act logically. The job of the courts isn't to come to the correct and fair conclusion. The job of the courts is to uphold state power.
What actually happens in these cases is that the cop makes up a charge to put on his arrest report. Usually "disorderly conduct" for which he can arrest you. Whether you're actually guilty of that or not doesn't matter, he can arrest you and fingerprint you (and strip search you). He forwards that to the DA, who decides not to file ch
Re:Absolutely not ... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
forget who you are for about an hour or so
Where do I sign up?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Absolutely not ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Why do they need to ask if they can read it from a distance?
Re:Absolutely not ... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Absolutely not ... (Score:5, Funny)
Or have recently eaten cheez-its.
Re: (Score:3)
If my gym tells me that the member that body slammed me in the locker room wasn't even in the building at the time, because the video shows some other clown used their card, I'll stil be asking for that member to be sent off. If they can match fingerprints and stop this roided-out putsz at the door, fair enough.
I use my fingerprint AND an RFID card to get into work. And I like my job. Biometrics are coming to you. Prepare.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
"I don't think you guys need my fingerprints."
They always respond with "We don't store your fingerprints." One guy said "we only store a couple of points." Ok, so you don't store the whole fingerprint, just a portion? "No, it is just biometrics."
And what exactly do you think a digital fingerprint is?
Ugh
Re: (Score:2)
The gym I go to required my fingerprints.
Of course, I volunteer there, and all the volunteers require a Vulnerable Sector Screening.
Impossible (Score:1)
Right... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think we've just eliminated fingerprints as a viable identification method.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Right... (Score:5, Insightful)
For many types of identity theft, often our only defense is that we're not worth impersonating.
Re: (Score:1)
yep. this device is not magic. it appears to be simply a camera with a decent lens, resolution, and lots of DSP.
it doesn't have security features lots of 0-distance readers have, such as temperature, conductivity, etc. checks.
therefore, highly susceptible to being faked out with e.g. photos of a fingerprint or even gummi fingers.
enjoy ur false sense of security, users of this machine!
Re: (Score:3)
I think we've just eliminated fingerprints as a viable identification method.
Contrary to popular opinion, fingerprints never were a viable method, thanks to confirmation bias.
Proof here [psmag.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Back when signatures were used to verify credit card transactions I had all sorts of problems with them. I injured my hand and couldn't reproduce the signature on my card very well. If we start using fingerprints then a single burn could make it very difficult for a person to live because not only will all their ID become invalid but they won't be able to make new forms of ID as they no longer have any fingerprints.
not a good thing (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't think perfect identification, be it biometric, technological, or other, is in any way a good thing.
There are perfectly valid reasons for needing or wanting aliases, which are not associated with being a criminal.
Take for instance, employees of a collections agency. These are people who perform a distasteful, but still required service. Nobody really likes being called by a bill collector, nor do they like having to use one to get deadbeat clients to pay up. Deadbeats especially, despise bill collectors, and some are even belligerent enough to be a real physical threat to collection employees. This is why many collections agencies provide work aliases for call center staff, etc. If a foolproof means of identifying people is developed, these employees are at risk.
Then you have the quintessential witness protection program. These are people that have witnessed a violent or serious crime, and are now embroiled through no fault of their own in some serious shit. If Big Tony can perfectly identify them through his ring of heavies using foolproof tech, this program becomes effectively worthless.
and last, but certainly far from least, you have the serious problems with the Feds, and their "Papers Please!" abuses. History does a fine job of explaining, in graphic, nightmare inducing detail, exactly why perfectly being identifiable by government officials is bad bad juju.
People making startups, and companies offering products:
I understand that there is a very strong demand for this kind of technology. Please also understand exactly *why* there is a demand for this kind of technology, and what it opens the door to. Is landing a fat contract and making bank worth endangering people's lives, and being directly complicit in abuses of power that very well inevitably kill people really worth it?
I personally dont think it is.
This kind of technology, in the broad and general sense, is not a good thing. Please stop developing it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Pandora's box of technology is already open. Our only option now is to try to shape the future, not return to the past. Don't close it with hope still inside.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Take for instance, employees of a collections agency. These are people who perform a distasteful, but still required service. Nobody really likes being called by a bill collector, nor do they like having to use one to get deadbeat clients to pay up. Deadbeats especially, despise bill collectors, and some are even belligerent enough to be a real physical threat to collection employees. This is why many collections agencies provide work aliases for call center staff, etc. If a foolproof means of identifying people is developed, these employees are at risk.
If you fear being associated with your employer, perhaps you should work someplace else? Also, you seem like a very judgmental person - I mean "deadbeats"? Have you conseidered the current economic environment and the fact that a LOT of people have lost their jobs?
Re:not a good thing (Score:5, Informative)
It doesn't matter what the circumstances are, really. If you take out a huge debt, then default, and then refuse to pay, you are a deadbeat client.
A collections agency deals exclusively with such clients. Some are honest people who have had a serious problem happen, such as a death in the family, a serious illness, or injury. Most of the people I know who work in collections are more than happy to work out an equitable payment plan for such people, if they can prove their condition.
The problem, is that there are also "Dedicated deadbeats" out there. They game the system for all it is worth, rack up debts of unbelievable amounts, then move, change their names, liquidate their on-credit purchases for cash, and settle somewhere else, leaving other people to hold the bag of their shit. These people invent sob stories all the time, hoping to weasle out of their obligations. Dealing with these people makes collections people innately distrustful and cynical.
I actually interned at a collection agency for awhile. I got to see just what percentages of the debtors were real, diehard deadbeats. we are talking people with a paper file that weighs 10 pounds, with 50 aliases.
These people far outnumber the honest debtors. Most honest people will try to bend over backwards to pay a bill before it reaches a collection agency. The people collection agencies deal with are the people that absolutely refuse to pay, despite being notified for months on end, as a usual practice.
Collection agencies are like trash collectors. They are not a glamorous vocation, and like trash collectors, being one puts you at risk. Trash collectors get unregistered medical waste from things like insulin syrenges in the trash that could stick them. They get exposed to all kinds of toxic chemical shit. Bill collectors have to work with people that would rather kill the bill collector than pay the bill.
As much as you seem to hate the bill collectors, they provide a valuable and essential service to modern society. There is no such thing as a free lunch, and often times, the bill collectors are all that stands between a glut of people gaming the system, and ruining it for everyone else.
Do you like running water? Electricity? Those services are not free to provide, and paying the people to provide them is how you get them. Most bills processed at the company I interned at were utility bills. With people wanting free utilities, by getting them in other people's names, under false names, and abusing the system in so many ways i cant even describe them all.
Contrary to what you might believe, a collections agency *CAN* pull your credit history, and see that while you owe a huge ass debt, you also spent 1000$ on a new laptop at newegg. As such, when you give a sob story about being laid off, they arent going to believe you. That 1000$ could have paid your 500$ debt, and left some over. Why didnt you make an effort to pay your debt?
Again, for the people who really *ARE* impoverished, their histories will clearly show that. You would be surprised how a properly informed agency can actually benefit such a debtor.
But of course, you hate collections people, because they make people pay what they legally owe.
but thanks for the derail anyway.
Re: (Score:1)
I don't think it's fair to use the term deadbeats to refer to everyone who can't repay their debts. Some are unable to repay through no fault of their own. It's a mathematical certainty and the banks are aware of it. They created the system that causes it.
Money is created as debt [youtube.com]. The principal comes into existence whenever money is borrowed from the bank - the bank just creates it out of thin air [youtube.com]. If there were no debt, there would be no money.
One of the problems with the system is that the interest i
Re: (Score:2)
Money comes to existence when it's borrowed from _central_ banks and the interest paid to the central bank ensures that the money has to be invested. As for the idea that it's a pyramid scheme I think it's a bit ridiculous, it's like saying the ever increasing production of goods and services in the economy itself isn't real and the only thing that is real is money.
The value of money comes from the fact that it's the legal currency and people are allowed to themselves value it as they wish. I'd hate to thin
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
If I understood you correctly you claim having to pay interest on loans is the cause why people default on their them, unless of course the central bank continuously loans more money to cover the "gap". I'm saying this doesn't take into account the fact that most of the time economies themselves grow and increase the wealth associated with them that is then used to pay the loans. Although the economy can't print money it can offset the "gap" by growing.
Re: (Score:1)
Right, so if I understand, the system can work if and only if the bank spends every penny of interest earned on goods, services, salaries... If the bank keeps, invests or re-lends any of the interest earnings, then we're doomed, or at least some of us will have to default, which I think is what's happening.
Still, best case is that all the money in circulation is borrowed from these private corporations and they're sucking up compound interest for doing virtually nothing. Would you agree then that the valu
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My brother had a friend that ran several credit collections companies. It turned out they were front organizations for organized crime.
Re: (Score:2)
Most of those are known as "abusive debt practices", and are illegal.
Don't misunderstand me here:
There are *plenty* of abusive creditors, and plenty of abusive collections agencies.
Sitting on a received check, or worse, cashing it and not crediting a balance, both have federal level restitutions and penalties, along with a whole lot of other abusive things.
The information on consumer protection is freely available. In addition to federal consumer protection, you may also be able to seek state level remedies
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
He's being accurate:
Deadbeat
(n)
1. One who does not pay one's debts.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/deadbeat
Re: (Score:1)
...
Take for instance, employees of a collections agency. These are people who perform a distasteful, but still required service. Nobody really likes being called by a bill collector, nor do they like having to use one to get deadbeat clients to pay up. Deadbeats especially, despise bill collectors, and some are even belligerent enough to be a real physical threat to collection employees. This is why many collections agencies provide work aliases for call center staff, etc. If a foolproof means of identifying people is developed, these employees are at risk.
Seriously dude, WTF?
Collection agencies are scum of the earth. They buy, in bulk and for very cheap, your debts, then harass you and your family to pay the bills. There has been numerous laws put on the books to protect people from bill collectors, mainly from the tactics that these people use.
These Collection Agencies are NOT any different then the Law firms that sue you on "behalf" of the Entertainment Industry.
In case you don't understand, lets put this in perspective. I owe you $50, and I haven't paid you yet, for whatever reason. You get tired of waiting, so you sell my debt of $50 to someone for lets say, $5. So are you going to be surprised when I don't pay that person $50? In fact, since I never had an agreement with that person, I do NOT plan on paying him shit. If you are stupid enough to sell my debt to you, then you just lost out your chance of getting your money.
And since you don't seem to understand, sometimes life sucks and you get behind in payments. Now, you might be able to pull yourself out, but a lot of times they won't work with you. You pay the $500 you owe now, or we send it to the collection agency. How you going to pay $500 now if you got no money? Does that make you a deadbeat? With the economy how it's been, fuck no. Banks get bailed out, people get shit on.
Re: (Score:2)
actually, I know people who used to run a collections agency. (now retired)
Most agencies that are worth a shit will work with clients to get a suitable arrangement going.
The problem is that many people refuse to make any effort at such an arrangement, or demand an arrangement that is unworkable for the collection agency. (The agency at most gets around 30% of the value of the bill. this means that your 100$ bill to little ceasar's is only worth 30$ to the bill collector. This is why they refuse to accept 5
Re: (Score:3)
You might not like collections agencies, but they do perform a legitimate service. If the bank merely dropped the debt, they'd have to raise fees (or cry for more bailout money) to cover the losses, and the rest of us would end up paying. I've never dealt with a collections agency from the other side, but I have written code for a sub-prime lender, and met a few in-house collections people. They weren't "scum of the earth" they were people trying to convince someone to uphold his part of an agreement. Witho
Re: (Score:2)
For every lock that was developed, there's also a lockpick.
It's the same for this. Just need to come up with a good lockpick. Something easy and ubiquitious enough that every person probably already possesses it.
Facial recognition can be defeated easily with a hood or a brimmed hat. Fingerprints can be defeated with gloves. And if certain services become draconian, then simply vote with your wallet.
Something you have, something you know, (Score:4, Insightful)
Something you are. This is just one of three.
It's funny they talk about not being connected to major crime databases - your employer would have a local copy that would be used for building access. Sure right up until they passed it off as part of your background check they'll run on everyone now. All part of your 90 day probationary period!
Re: (Score:2)
The thing is, in case of compromise altering the stuff you have and the stuff you know is far easier than altering the stuff you are. For example, how would you easily replace a thumbprint?
6 feet, 6 meters (Score:2)
Something got lost in translation, I guess...
Well then. (Score:2)
Cracking your fingers (Score:2)
Second try of an old system... http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Cracking-your-Fingers.aspx [thedailywtf.com]
Fingerprints != valid method of identificaton (Score:5, Insightful)
There are several problems with this technology most importantly how it will be used.
#1.) Cops will use it like minority report. WOOO we know where you are
#2.) This leads to number 2. Computers are not really used to perform fingerprint analysis. Yes, they can shorten the list but, in the end, its always a human who decides if its a "match"
#3.) There is no standard protocol for deciding if two fingerprints match. It is completely subjective. The IAI has flat out said they won't create a protocol because its not possible
#4.) There is no predictable margin of error. Frankly with no protocol and 100% subjective human interpretation, there is no way to quantify the probability of a match or more importantly, the margin of error.....heck, fingerprint analysts have been shown to make different identification to the same prints on different days and in different context.
#4) fingerprint analysis operates on the assumption that all fingerprints are unique (or unique within a reasonable margin of error). There has never been any evidence to support this assumption. Even the FBI with probably the worlds largest fingerprint database has never published any data suggesting finger prints are unique.
This all leads to the worst part. Law Enforcement will put this in an automated system to read our prints around town and assume its good enough to harass, arrest and convict citizens.
I don't like where this is going.
Dont get me wrong, its cool tech. Its just going to make a mess of things
Re: (Score:2)
You forgot #5. The courts don't really care about #1-4, and will reject any challenges to fingerprint evidence.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, it's always seemed to me that the biggest problem with fingerprint identification is that everyone leaves the silly things all over the place all the time - imagine a world where everything you touch is left with a copy of your house and car keys.
Seriously, since we've have advanced cyanocacrylate-enhanced gummy bear fingerprint recovery and duplication technologies [slashdot.org] for over a decade now, why does anyone even *think* that fingerprints are a secure ID/auth method anymore?
Unless we all actually do s
Micahel Jackson knew this was coming (Score:4, Funny)
...but was unsure how he felt, hence the one glove.
Hey, guys, scan this fingerprint. Yeah, the one on my middle finger, that's right.
Re: (Score:2)
...but was unsure how he felt, hence the one glove.
Hey, guys, scan this fingerprint. Yeah, the one on my middle finger, that's right.
You have to turn it around. They can't scan your fingernail.
It's not as bad as it sounds (Score:5, Informative)
After a little RTFA time, I don't think it's quite like the blurb makes it sound. The system can't scan dozens of people walking down a sidewalk (unlike the facial recognition technology used in most "free" countries today). The user has to actively wave at it to allow it to scan.
One concern the article raised is that it appears the prints are stored on the machine as an image (or perhaps a series of numbers describing the layout) rather than a cryptographically secure hash of the print. So if you steal the system, you get a bunch of free pictures of people's prints...and you probably get all of the prints on the hand, since they would likely scan every digit and compare it to the database. As prints become a more common means of identification, those boxes become as valuable as credit card and SSN databases. Although I'm sure the security of 24-hour Fitness and Target are second to none.
... this means fingerprints can't be used for ID (Score:4, Interesting)
If someone needs to lift finger prints from a subject it has traditionally meant that someone needs to get him to touch something. With this, a guy can walk behind you, take a few pictures without ever touching you, and have your finger prints printed out in rubber.
Rather then giving us a better way to use finger prints... this means we have to go to retina scans.
There has to be a better way.
Re: (Score:1)
There has to be a better way.
Rectal Scans
Re: (Score:2)
No worries... (Score:4, Interesting)
Nobody will every buy it. Except for government, fingerprint security is largely dead dead dead.
First off, fingerprints can be replicated. Secondly, these types of optical systems have a (relatively) high failure rate (dust, smudges, adverse lighting conditions, etc). Next, they don't work with anyone under the age of 18 with reliability (the ridges and such vary considerably in size). Lastly - it freaks out the customers.
Anyone that thinks fingerprint security is going to succeed in the market is delusional at best. Been there, spent millions, done that. No matter how good the system is or how safe the fingerprints are it just isn't going to be good enough for anything other than a door lock.
Glove time (Score:1)
Angular resolution (Score:4, Interesting)
Hang on, what about the angular resolution of visible light at 6m, with indents in surely being 0.1mm? Can we get high enough resolution Is that even possible? How fast must the picture be taken to avoid blurring?
No, haven't RTFA. So sue me.
Re: (Score:2)
Hang on, what about the angular resolution of visible light at 6m, with indents in surely being 0.1mm? Can we get high enough resolution Is that even possible? How fast must the picture be taken to avoid blurring?
The resolution is doable. There's a tradeoff between speed and noise. What you can do is take many pictures, align them and take a sum to get rid of some noise. If my memory serves me the noise will go down with the square root of the number of pictures. Or just pump up the light in say infrared spectrum, if you have 10 times illumination you can cut the exposition time to 1/10 and get about the same quality.
Re: (Score:2)
I have an idea (Score:2)
Thanks a lot but.. (Score:1)
fneh (Score:2)
I wonder if the thing can read fingerprints through a pair of leathers... I THINK NOT!
Not when I'm wearing gloves... (Score:2)
heh, heh...
Then there's the idea of wearing someone else's fingerprints on your fingers, like James Bond in Diamonds Are Forever. How long after this long-range reading technology comes out before some enterprising criminal starts selling other people's fingerprints already built in to some sort of finger covers?
Seriously, this sort of thing should be made illegal - even for cops.
OTOH, it seems to me you'd have to approach someone from the rear because when most people walk, their hands are facing to the RE
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That should finally kill fingerprints for security (Score:2)
A password you cannot change but can read out 6 meters away without the victim knowing, isn't a good idea. Fingerprints are useless for security and this project simply proves that. You can do, at most, identification, but not authentication.