• rekorse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would never consider fingerprints or face scans to be secure even for personal devices. I guess if theres literally nothing to protect, if thats possible.

        • rekorse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I do understand the point that the biometrics are replacing very short pins usually, oftentimes 4 digits only but I dont quite see how that makes the passcodes worse than the biometrics.

          I’d say even a 6 digit passcode with a randomized number pad, alongside an emergency wipe pin, would do better than biometrics, which also need to have a passcode setup as backup anyhow.

          Maybe you could play out a few scenarios that illustrate your point?

            • rekorse@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Randomized keypads are for touchscreens, although like you said sort of not common for desktop workstations.

              Just comparing a password to biometrics though on say a laptop or desktop, there is the major drawnback that you can be forced either knowingly or unknowingly to put in a biometric to unlock a device. It would be easier to circumvent then a standard password (at my company and the clients we work with, 16 characters is standard) with an encrypted hard drive.

              This is all deduction ive made from other things I know to be true though, if you happen to know of a resource that explains both methods of securing g a workstation and the risks associated, I’d love to read it.

              I also do agree overall that password less makes the most sense now, as people are never going to get better at making secure passwords and remembering them.