Police unlock dead man's phone with 3d printed fingerprints

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**reds8n**

http://thehackernews.com/2016/07/3d-fingerprint-phone-unlock.html

Now no more fight with Apple or any smartphone maker, as federal authorities have discovered a new tool for unlocking phones, as far as your phone is using any biometric sensor…
3D Printing!
Yes, Police in Michigan is considering 3D printing a dead man’s fingers so they could unlock smartphones in investigation crimes using their biometric sensors.

A new report published today from Flash Forward creator Rose Eveleth revealed that the police recently approached professors at the University of Michigan to reproduce a dead man’s fingerprint from a prerecorded scan.
Once reproduced, the 3D print would be used to create a false fingerprint of the dead man, which could then be used to unlock his smartphone using its biometric sensors.
The man was a murder victim, and law enforcement investigators believed that his phone might contain some useful information relevant to the case.
Why Police Can't 3D-Print Themselves? Because...
Since smartphone biometric sensors used to detect someone’s fingerprints today rely on electrical currents that most 3D-printed objects can not conduct, such technique would not normally work and help investigators get into the victim’s phone.
This, in turn, made the police approach professor Anil Jain, who told Fusion that he "coated the 3D printed fingers in a thin layer of metallic particles" so that they could conduct electricity and "the fingerprint scanner can read them," helping the police catch the murderer.
Sounds great... Right?

But that will not always be the case.
When thinking about its implications and consequences in future, this technique could make everyone vulnerable who uses biometric security to protect the privacy of their smartphones.
Since fingerprints are the unique and all time the constant identity of a person, there is a risk of having someone steal a fingerprint using a high-resolution photo and recreating it that way.
Since the investigation is ongoing, much details about the technique are not available.
The best solution, for now, is to disable any biometric sensor enabled on your smartphone, just in case you don't want the police or anyone else to 3D print a replica of your fingers and unlock it with ease. Rather set a secure password to lock your device.
Remember: You can change your passwords if it is stolen, but you cannot change your fingerprints.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

I have no problem with the police doing this or approaching the manufacturers and asking them to unlock a phone if the person in question is a murder victim, but a line needs to be drawn between victims and suspects.

And on another note, is that biometrics out the window?

They can print your fingerprints, they can remove your eyeball...

We're doomed!!!

**kronk**

This is why I pay a monthly fee for a service that wipes out my internet browser history on my cell phone and computer should I die.

Or something.

**feeder**

This was inevitable, really. Once biometrics was a thing, the tech to fool it was never very far behind.

It seems it may be here now.

**Necros**

So wait, we won't have to cut out people's eyeballs like minority report anymore? Cool, that will save a lot of cleanup time.

**Gordon Shumway**

Why didn't they just use his actual finger?

**LordofHats**

Gordon Shumway wrote:
Why didn't they just use his actual finger?

That might be a bit too macabre

**aldo**

Gordon Shumway wrote:
Why didn't they just use his actual finger?

That would be unhygienic and probably break a bunch of health and safety rules, and probably some protocols regarding manipulation of proof too.
And it wouldn't be half as cool, nor give them and excuse to request a budget increase to get more toys to play with.

**Mario**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

And on another note, is that biometrics out the window?

Biometrics were never a really secure solution, that's just a complicated but convenient (if you are accessing your device) or inconvenient (others accessing your device) username. They are not changeable and you kinda leave fingerprints everywhere. They are not passwords even if they are used in that way. It would be a bit like me using "blue" as a password because that's my eye colour (just much longer) and the people who would want access to my data would also know what they need to look for.

**PourSpelur**

He could have been found in the water, or spent some time buried or just in the woods. I can imagine fingers being one of the first things to go.

**jmurph**

I think it interesting that the article ends by encouraging people to disable such biometric access so police can't access your data. So if you get murdered (like the guy that they used it with) you make sure they can't get leads on your killer, I guess.

Since people seem more than happy to post everything they are doing, provide GPS movement data, etc, I can't imagine what most people would be afraid the police would see. Porn, maybe?

**Kap'n Krump**

LordofHats wrote:
Gordon Shumway wrote:
Why didn't they just use his actual finger?

That might be a bit too macabre

But efficient, and badass!

**nkelsch**

I have always wondered... are they legally allowed to 'strongarm' someone into unlocking a device or system with biometrics?

I assume if you are a corpse they can do it with your dead fingers.

**Peregrine**

jmurph wrote:
Since people seem more than happy to post everything they are doing, provide GPS movement data, etc, I can't imagine what most people would be afraid the police would see. Porn, maybe?

Why find out? We have more than enough evidence that the police can't be trusted, so the default should be "don't let the police have anything".

**chromedog**

They've used dead fingers to get fingerprint ID before.

There was a case where body had been immersed or something, and the skin was too loose for normal inking for a 10 card - so it (the finger skin) was cut away and basically worn "as a glove" on a gloved finger to get a better result.

That was just for an inked print they could scan, though.

The current biometric sensor things use skin conductivity - and dead flesh may just have different properties that don't work (they won't secrete sweat or oils the same and putrefaction does create different chemical properties).

I just use a pin. None of my phones have ever used biometrics (not that I'd trust apple with my biometric data anyway).

**Jihadin**

Kap'n Krump wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
Gordon Shumway wrote:
Why didn't they just use his actual finger?

That might be a bit too macabre

But efficient, and badass!

Body heat trigger

**Spetulhu**

aldo wrote:
Gordon Shumway wrote:
Why didn't they just use his actual finger?

That would be unhygienic and probably break a bunch of health and safety rules, and probably some protocols regarding manipulation of proof too.

Besides, you might be slapped with a lawsuit over "desecrating dead bodies" or some such.

**TheCustomLime**

jmurph wrote:
I think it interesting that the article ends by encouraging people to disable such biometric access so police can't access your data. So if you get murdered (like the guy that they used it with) you make sure they can't get leads on your killer, I guess.

Since people seem more than happy to post everything they are doing, provide GPS movement data, etc, I can't imagine what most people would be afraid the police would see. Porn, maybe?

I don't think it's so much that you want to prevent cops from getting your killer as much as it is not wanting the police to be able to get into your phone without your consent. Like Peregrine said, they can not be trusted. Plus, there is also the possibility that this technology will be adopted by criminals.

**SilverMK2**

TheCustomLime wrote:
jmurph wrote:
I think it interesting that the article ends by encouraging people to disable such biometric access so police can't access your data. So if you get murdered (like the guy that they used it with) you make sure they can't get leads on your killer, I guess.

Since people seem more than happy to post everything they are doing, provide GPS movement data, etc, I can't imagine what most people would be afraid the police would see. Porn, maybe?

I don't think it's so much that you want to prevent cops from getting your killer as much as it is not wanting the police to be able to get into your phone without your consent. Like Peregrine said, they can not be trusted. Plus, there is also the possibility that this technology will be adopted by criminals.

If you ban biometrics, only criminals will have them... or something...

**Breotan**

Wouldn't it have been easier to push the dead guy's finger into some greenstuff and use that as a mold for a latex duplicate?