Short answer no.
Long answer nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
at least FaceID is locally stored and not in the cloud
Sure it is.
Do we have any reason to believe that it isn’t? Generally I don’t know if Apple has lied about what data is local before.
Local storage can still be part of the cloud.
Can you prove that when it is not open source?
It’s not sharing, it’s giving. Sharing implies they’ll share back, and I have yet to see photographic evidence of Zuckerberg’s human eyes.
should you share biometric data online?
FUCK NO! And this is why - These abusive corporate sites already prison-rape our privacy, profile us and sell our secrets to who-the-fuck-ever will pay for it. Meanwhile, they can’t keep their databases secure, so our personal and private details go for sale on the dark web. It’s then used to screw us over further by extortion, theft and identity theft, which is really difficult to rectify. Who the hell thinks giving these incompetent morons more unique identifying data to keep safe for us is a good idea? If you’re in doubt just go for a visit to the data breaches community on any instance that has one. The thing we NEED to be doing is taking control of our own identities by implementing web3 technology and using methods that preserve our data for our own use. We decide who gets what. One example for clarification purposes is something like InternetComputer’s solution.
We’ve all grown accustomed to managing hundreds of usernames and passwords, recovering forgotten accounts over text or email, unwittingly permitting companies to profit from our data at the cost of our personal privacy, all while falling victim to threats of identity theft and fraud.
On the Internet Computer blockchain, users can securely authenticate themselves without ever needing an email, username, or password. Using a passkey, users can login conveniently without their information being monetized by tech companies. Internet Identity is designed to prevent Web3 services to track user activity across dapps.
And yes, you could still use fingerprint or faceID, but you’re not handing it over to anyone else.
The problem with a lot of bio based systems is that they are spoofable on one hand, you cannot change them on the other, they are not secrets, and using them discloses them.
Face ID is a good example. Lot of these systems you can just hold up a photo. Apple is the only vendor that I would consider using face id with as theirs is believed to be fairly good.
Share biometric data?
I use biometrics as a form of security, which would be counterproductive if I “shared” it online.
Passwords are easy to change, biometrics are not.
So, if biometrics aren’t used as a local-only option, then I won’t use it. Simple as that.
No, full stop
I see this the same as a company asking for a SSN. I didn’t pick it, it is really hard to change without physical/mental pain, and is spoofable anyway.
Based on those criteria… I’m not sure why I care about sharing it. I wouldn’t solely use it for something I’m securing myself, but if some company wants too, I don’t really take issue.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
While facial recognition and fingerprints are some of the most commonly used features, gait analysis, analysing a person’s walk, and Amazon’s “palm signatures” also use biometric data.
Apple was one of the first companies to move to the commercial use of biometric data in 2013 with Touch ID, giving users the possibility to use their fingerprint to unlock their phones.
“Biometric data skips some of the problems that we have with passwords,” said Melissa Goldstein, associate professor at George Washington University’s Milken Institute School of Public Health.
Amazon, for instance, boasts about its palm payment system One, which is “100 times more secure than scanning two irises,” and the company hasn’t seen a single false positive “after millions of interactions among hundreds of thousands of enrolled identities”.
“Valid consent is a specific requirement of the GDPR,” said Felix Mikolasch, a data protection lawyer at the non-profit NOYB, the European Centre for Digital Rights.
Last year, the French, Greek, Italian and UK data authorities each fined Clearview, a US company creating facial recognition databases from images on the Internet, including on social media, because it breached GDPR.
The original article contains 843 words, the summary contains 186 words. Saved 78%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
