Topic: Assumption (Read 474 times)

However I still think having a fingerprint for wallet security is still not a really secure option, let alone making it a private key. If it's ever implemented in the future, I'll probably stay safe with the old method of wallet creation where only the person with the seed and private key can access the wallet.

So far I use my fingerprint to access my Metamask wallet, it might be a bit risky when I have to carry my phone everywhere I go so that in the end I don't keep my funds there. The same may be thought by those who secure wallets with fingerprints.

What happens if your finger print refuses to scan?
Either ways, so many person's might be walking with one finger, because of theft.

It is known that once you are not in the shoes you cannot know how it feels ,who wasnt present won't have the experience ,you cannot base a debate or an experience based on assumption because you won't give the accurate or detailed information, assumptions are probability not properly investigated.

Until that happens you can 'lock' your private keys using finger print lock on your phone 

Actually it's just a recent that i noticed that my fingers print can as well open my trust wallet during the time of sending out cryptocurrency and especially bitcoin, last week, after my trading transaction i noticed that my print unlocked by wallet instead of the security password, the challenge is that no cryptocurrency wallet can accept of replacement of fingerprint with seed phrase

It would have been nice to an alternative to the seed phrase.  If finger print is the option it may stop working because anything can happen to the finger that can damage the finger. But to make it an alternative to seed phrase will look good when the seed phase can't be find finger print can be used.

Fingerprint would have been a best option but I believe it would be very easy for the hackers to hack your fingerprints and have access to your wallet. So the phrase key method is still good. Although the fingerprint is also good.

Get them fresh mate    get them fresh, before the corpse rottens, hahaha, this idea is dangerous for the masses, there will be new criminals on the block that only hunts for people who have such wallets, a very bad idea indeed.

Smiles ... How cool would it be getting your finger chopped off. Not so cool at all right?
A finger print for a private key is gonna be the easiest means of getting access to anyone's wallet as it will increase security risk even to life

Come to think of those set of people that sleeps deeply like hell, their fingers  could easily be used to access their wallet by their close friends or relatives while asleep.
Don't you think so?

Fingerprint connected to wallet address is like DNA connected to wallet address. If fingerprint cant be recorded and modified which i don't think its possible. This will be very secure and safe. And make it easy for ones family to inherit ones crypto wallet after death.
All they need is finger. Lol.

To every technology there is always a counter technology especially if the process is not cryptographic in nature. Having finger print on wallets could be riskier than having your coin on a CEX, reasons been that you stand high risk of having your fingers chopped off just to have a copy of your finger print or a soft ware can be produced that saves finger prints once it's generated once. It's a bad idea to think of this

Funny dude 🤣. Well, that's not how that stuff works. Nobody will embark on such cadaver hunt. It's meaningless. You think a dead man's swollen fingers will retain the same prints as when he were alive? Nah! Just try logging into your phone if you've finger print lock on it when your finger is numb or wet and see what happens. You won't be able to gain access to it. Let alone when the person is dead and swollen. This is because the phone readings won't be able to recognize one's finger print as the original one which was entered owing to the fact that the structure of one's fingers would've changed.

As much as this idea would have been cool, we should consider both the pros and cons. If its consideration as a security barrier attracted us to adopting this technique, then some persons would be left out especially those who work with lime(calcium oxide) because of its basicity, it wears away the top layers of the skin.

And surprisingly, people who handle or deal with paper on a constant basis tend to wear down the ridge detail of their fingers too. Then what about hackers who will concentrate on getting people's prints since it can be everywhere we put our hands on. This technique will make many people vulnerable to attack than its supposed benefit.

This will only make accessing your wallet faster, instead of copying and pasting or even typing them in. But where the big problem comes is in a case of accident and something happens to the finger, that’s it you can’t access your wallet anymore, great loss at the end.
Also, thumbprint can easily be stolen anywhere you place your thumb on. Maybe even in an office or anywhere where thumbprint is required in order to get access to such place or use something there.

This is so funny  as I never even think about this until you made this point, it's a very valid point though 😂

Well, I think it cool but it will be some worth insecure, because a lot of people can do anything just to have money. Imagine someone breaking into your home or blocking you anywhere and he knows what he need is always within your body, your phone and your finger is all he need to get hold of your funds, he won't mind even cutting off your finger. So to me it somehow cool but totally insecure.

Just seeing this reply because its been a while I checked this thread out, it's good to see that a crypto company already did something similar to what I've said but it did look riskier than normal crypto wallets we all are used to, thanks for the reply

The assumption of the OP is cool but every advantage also comes with disadvantages and in a situation when an accident happens to the user that makes use of the fingerprint or the person was copied by theft and later use to access people wallet.
I think I am fine with the way crypto wallets are currently operated though.

You are making a good point, indecencies that the security of wallet would have be perfect one from my own perspective, at times i do use my finger print to Access my trust wallet with the help of my handset setting, i know we are assuming but i know it will not work, but i believe in advance time all this seed phrase will be transformed by using fingerprint to access cryptocurrency private key's.

I have read the OP more than once to make sure I understand what he meant.
The biometrics I already in existence for wallets, however the finger print is to confirm ownership and grant access to the wallet.
But from the concept OP is coming from if I didn't misunderstand him is embedding the private keys in the owner's finger print.
If this be feasible, to what essence? Will it not defeat the idea of privacy?
I mean criminals will target victims fingers.
It this is to work better, there should be an option to embed the private keys in any part of your body. Such that I may decide to embed mine in the ampit or buttocks.

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.

Technology haven't reached this stage but assuming your fingerprint can be implemented into your crypto wallet private keys, assuming once you create a wallet you have to pass finger print scan and that gets fold up to that particular private key for life, how cool will this be?