openmic.social is an uncensored community. You may encounter strong language, controversial opinions, and mature or NSFW material. You must be 18+ to browse. Illegal content is prohibited and removed on sight — please report it. By continuing, you accept that you may see content you personally disagree with.
In the USA, they can legally force you to unlock a device using biometrics.
Also, biometrics can be fooled in other ways.
Yes, but that’s besides the point. If the convenient options for a normie user are
Out of those the fingerprint with a strong password is way better option, imo.
Also, how does that work? Can’t they legally force you to enter your password too? Or can you claim you don’t remember it? If that works, can’t you just have a band-aid on your finger or something? Surely they cannot force you to take it off and risk getting an infection on the large wound you just happened to get yesterday…?
A normal user will most likely never encounter a situation where their weak password would be at risk, but are much more likely to having their biometrics forced by law enforcement or border control.
They will rip your bandaid off and force your finger or face to scan while holding your device.
Any weak password at all would have been better in a situation like that.
How?
You can’t be compelled to give up your password.
A weak password they can guess.
Compared to guaranteed success, a weak password is superior.
Youre comparing a weak password to no password here and suggesting no password is better.
I’m not. I have never seen a device that can be set up without a password or pin in addition to face or fingerprint unlock.
You have to have both.
Once the biometrics are there, it replaces the pin/password in most scenarios I can think of.
Cell phone access, logging into a PC, etc.
Setting up both doesn’t mean that both are required for access.
Biometrics can be compelled (forced). So face or fingerprint can be forced, making them irrelevant to security - the same as no password.