Topic: Assumption - page 2. (Read 474 times)

Unfortunately, we don't have the technology to actually compare entirely a fingerprint so it relies on contact points or splits into those tiny lines in the fingerprints, basically a pattern that can be easily matched against thousands of other fingerprints easily and of course, once you only focus on those and you exclude others from it the number of possibilities goes down and the number of possible collisions goes up.
And not all of us have the same number of trigger points, the normal fingerprints scanners we have are just comparing these, if you're unlucky you have a fingerprint with a low number of such randoms factors the security of your fingerprint is also going to be low for low model scanners, making it virtually possible for an individual to have a match for you while the opposite not being true.
Better sensors, better chips, more details required would bring the security up but it will come it a lot of headaches for a frustrated user swiping his sweaty hands.

Anyhow using as security something that can't be reseted to access a thing that can't reset its password either and once the password is known anyone can use it with restriction from anywhere is really a dangerous gamble.

I admit, fingerprint access is pretty damn cool, I have a friend who has a door like this to his house, he has registered profiles, he can allow them to unlock or not the door, he doesn't has to give any time keys to his relatives to visit, he can stop them from entering if they come unannounced and he doesn't want them there, he will not have to switch the lock if the kid loses his key and so on. No worries about losing keys either but that's a door in a private complex full of camera and a security guard, even if the thief would get access to his fingerprints no way in hell he could rob him as easily as a bitcoin address with a known key.

Well, you do know what Oscar Wilde said about assuming, don't you?

Besides the very serious possibility of losing one or more of my fingers (all of which I have become very attached to, over the years), and all the other reasons already exposed, I'd be very wary of any "solution" that would demand the use of a specific piece of hardware to work. That hardware could be stolen from you, could malfunction, or could simply be phased out.

I don't think it's cool because we have to be more careful holding things. In addition, our fingerprints will always be left on the things we hold. A hacker can find a way to get our fingerprints without cutting our fingers.

Maybe they will use a method like in Fast Furious 5 where Hans and Giselle observe Reyes get his fingerprints. That is one thing that hackers might do.

I prefer the methods we've used so far because they're probably safe for me.

The possibility to this is only applicable if the finger prints will also be used as a 2FA verification during the process of generating your seed and private keys, then to access the wallet, one will be left with the option to choose between the fingerprint authentication means or through private keys in accessing the wallet, also the wallet app can also get secured before launching using a password or fingerprint before the requirements for private keys.

Small time many criminals will be hunting for even a dead man's finger where he is buried, cemeteries wont have a peace night every day lol, before you know what's going on all fingers of the dead will be missing, it's a bad idea.

It sounds cool but I don't think it would be a feasible solution. For instance, as some have already mentioned, your fingerprints are left on everything you touch with your bare hands. It really wouldn't be that hard for someone to copy your fingerprint and derive your private keys from it. It is also possible for your fingerprints to be damaged in case of an accident (for example, many substances can cause damage to your skin or you may get injured in a fire).

Besides, I believe there are already some hardware wallets with biometric protection. Although your private keys are not directly related to your fingerprints, you use a fingerprint to unlock your wallet.

How would it work exactly?

If the private keys would somehow be derived from your fingerprint, it's an absolute no go.
If your fingerprint would be a sort of 2FA, where you need your private key + the correct fingerprint, it's still dangerous and could come back to hurt you. Besides, we already have wallets that can be locked/unlocked with your fingerprint.

I met a guy once who almost has no fingerprints at all. I say almost because he was told they are 90% less recognizable and detectable compared to other people. He worked with hot water and washed dishes for decades. I guess he basically burned them away. You could also become a victim of an acid accident or house fire, get burns on your hands that alter your fingerprints.

Too many things could go wrong, so it's unsafe. Making such changes only makes sense if they solve existing problems. In this case, they create additional problems.

It is cool but probably a lot of debate will arise from it which could totally risk thr security. Im sure many genius out therr have been thinking this already but yet we see a sophisticated and accurate application. Whether its proven Im still gonna be hesitant to apply this until many or let say 70% adopted it already just to make sure it safe.

That's dangerous. It is what I've thought of quickly upon reading that idea.

As you know, there were robbers that have penetrated to the house of a victim when they've known that person is a crypto investor. You don't want that to happen to you and to others.

This is the example of it: Robbers Tortured a Man With a Drill to Steal His Cryptocurrency

I’m not sure if the idea would be to use fingerprint biometrics as the sole method for gaining access to the crypto or not. Many of the potential risks have been enumerated in the posts above, and whilst biometrics has a large evolving playing field, there are variable results depending on the subjacent algorithm used and the number of data points it considers.

Since the idea would be to use regular device fingerprint scanners to give us an idea, Apple currently makes it a 1 in 50 000 chance of fingerprint collision. Not near being good enough for universal sole access based of fingerprint scans.

Potentially, the more biometrics around, the higher the chance that a DB with this data and ID data could be hacked, and it wouldn’t be unfeasible for that data to be used in the aftermaths in attempting to access crypto protected by biometrics on its own.

ZenGo[1] already does something similar — they use facial biometrics(face mapping) for your wallet backups in a non-custodial manner.

Not that I recommend using this wallet, but it's definitely interesting.

---

[1] https://zengo.com/security/

Although if we look it from the safety or identification perspective then fingerprints are useful in some cases but it won't work with bitcoin wallets due to many issues.As other members have already said that if wallets come up with these biometric identification then your are prone to some risk of cutting it by some gang who comes to know about it.But it may sound too filmy but anything could happen at the time.

Study shows that your fingerprint tends to have the same pattern over the age as they only scale up as you grow with age.But there could be some cases in which taking fingerprints becomes tough like say if you have some skin problems and you can't access your wallets then what?

Problem with old people fingerprints:


There are lot of other issues with it and you can check this useful article for the same : Fingerprint studies

So you see this idea maybe sounds cool to you at first instance but after analysing the whole situation it becomes worthless to adapt to it.Something works fine in the traditional way as going with technology is fine but it also has its risk associated with them so you need it offline only.

It would be unsafe, hence far from cool.
Also, it's not uncommon to get your finders dirty, cut, burned and you cannot access your phone with fingerprint. Just imagine it it's the only way to access a couple of Bitcoin. How (un)cool would that be?
And yes, biometrics can be copied, or fingers can be cut... (and you always have them with you = not so good)

So you better hide the seed on paper, steel or whatever you find appropriate, best to hide in multiple different places (far from each other). It's not that "cool", but it's safe.

I, for one, would never leave my house without wearing surgical latex gloves if i had derived my private key from my fingerprint... If i would leave even a single print, i'd be at risk of getting robbed... Not to mention the $5 wrench (or hedgeclipper) attack in this case (as mentioned in the first reply), and i'd be terrified the police would ever have my fingerprint on file, since in my country "cyber security" is a big black box for law enforcement (at least, that's my perception of them).

Nah, I don't think that's cool idea since it increase the chance of your wallet got compromised. If your fingerprint is your private key, it's like you're carrying your private key on everywhere. A robbers doesn't need to rob your phone and other expensive stuffs, they only need your fingerprint to know your private key What about biometrics face recognition, that's more terrible idea.

Yes, that will be a dangerous thing to do exclusively. It should come as an option to other alternatives. Already, certain wallets give us that option for a log in. I've finger print enabled on my Metamask and Trust Wallets. There are times I'm not even able to log in with that, maybe whenever my finger numbs. Assuming that's the only option, it would simply mean I would be stranded from accessing my wallet or performing transactions just because of technology I allowed to happen to me 😆. The bad side to it again will be MOST people not wanting to have anything to do with a wallet that gives them that as the only option. It will fall flat on its face.

Is it not? There is definitely a lot of lines and curves on each print, although I have no technical knowledge in this matter but it looks like the permutations could be high enough.
In any case it shouldn't be used for a lot of reasons such as the fact that your fingerprint could be easily lifted from you whenever you touch any surface!

Even if we could, we wouldn't do that because it would make the system and its users vulnerable to attacks, hacking, phishing, etc.

In cryptography you are protected only by randomness of the key. The security of the system depends on it. Your private keys are not actually yours, because you can't claim ownership over random numbers, and you can't prove you were the first who generated such a number. Moreover, it seems you don't understand how wallets work because private keys have no connection with the wallet with which they were generated, and coins aren't stored inside the wallet. All coins are essentially scripts, small sequences of instructions, on the blockchain, and keys are specific numbers that make these scripts work and follow instructions. Wallets, on the other hand, are just a tool with which you can (but are not necessarily obligated) generate your keys, addresses, send or receive transactions. Wallets are secondary in principle, you can choose absolutely any wallet according to your preferences, but it cannot be tied to your identity, as well as private keys.

Also, biometrics sucks.

That's "cool" but insecure.
The number of fingerprint variations aren't even close to the total number of valid private keys.

Plus depending on the method; for example, if it's just based from basic details of the fingerprint (like our smartphone use), collisions may occur.
You'll get unique results if the method is based from the 'minute details', however, a slight scratch could produce a different result.

...I think the technology is already available but no one wants to implement such idea.

It'll hurt to get a finger cut off . Or have the police say they needed everyone's fingerprint and then just mould copies they can use to access your funds.

The body changes a lot and so do fingerprints, it's not a good idea to use biometrics like that for that reason.