For those who use FaceID, I simply ask one obvious question:
*Which slum do you live in that you feel you _need_ FaceID anyway?*

Me?

I don't lock my doors or windows at night.
My driveway gate has a latch you can reach around to walk in.
The FedEx/UPS/Amazon guy has the gate code (the USPS won't use it though).
My kids' extra unused cars are parked outside, always unlocked.
My barn is left unlocked, as is the fence gate around the pool.

My smartphone can do ALL the PIN/LOCK/ENCRYPT methods; I use none of them.
Why not?

Because I'm not afraid of someone snatching my phone out of my hands.
That's why.

I feel sorry for those of you who live in the slums where you _do_ have to
worry about someone sneaking up behind you to snatch your phone away.

Which brings up the obvious question for all who use FaceID gimmickry...
*Which slum do you live in that you feel you _need_ FaceID anyway?*

Andy Burnelli wrote:
> For those who use FaceID, I simply ask one obvious question:
>  *Which slum do you live in that you feel you _need_ FaceID anyway?*
>
> Me?
>
> I don't lock my doors or windows at night.
> My driveway gate has a latch you can reach around to walk in.
> The FedEx/UPS/Amazon guy has the gate code (the USPS won't use it though).
> My kids' extra unused cars are parked outside, always unlocked.
> My barn is left unlocked, as is the fence gate around the pool.
>
> My smartphone can do ALL the PIN/LOCK/ENCRYPT methods; I use none of them.
> Why not?
>
> Because I'm not afraid of someone snatching my phone out of my hands.
> That's why.
>
> I feel sorry for those of you who live in the slums where you _do_ have to
> worry about someone sneaking up behind you to snatch your phone away.
>
> Which brings up the obvious question for all who use FaceID gimmickry...
>  *Which slum do you live in that you feel you _need_ FaceID anyway?*
Why not put a poster on the gate saying "Everything here is free for the
taking"?
Ed

On 2022-08-25 03:27:32 +0000, Andy Burnelli said:

> For those who use FaceID, I simply ask one obvious question:
> *Which slum do you live in that you feel you _need_ FaceID anyway?*
>
> Me?
>
> I don't lock my doors or windows at night.
> My driveway gate has a latch you can reach around to walk in.
> The FedEx/UPS/Amazon guy has the gate code (the USPS won't use it though).
> My kids' extra unused cars are parked outside, always unlocked.
> My barn is left unlocked, as is the fence gate around the pool.
>
> My smartphone can do ALL the PIN/LOCK/ENCRYPT methods; I use none of them.
> Why not?
>
> Because I'm not afraid of someone snatching my phone out of my hands.
> That's why.
>
> I feel sorry for those of you who live in the slums where you _do_ have to
> worry about someone sneaking up behind you to snatch your phone away.
>
> Which brings up the obvious question for all who use FaceID gimmickry...
> *Which slum do you live in that you feel you _need_ FaceID anyway?*

You live well, sir. Until recently I lived in San Francisco and
had to think seriously about taking my phone out in public.

- m@

Andy Burnelli wrote:

> My smartphone can do ALL the PIN/LOCK/ENCRYPT methods; I use none of them.
> Why not?
>
> Because I'm not afraid of someone snatching my phone out of my hands.
> That's why.

And you're *so* sure of your ability to not drop it out your pocket or leave it
behind somewhere?

In article <news:te7n7f$3kshe$1@dont-email.me>, Ed Cryer
<ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> says...

> Why not put a poster on the gate saying "Everything here is free for the
> taking"?

That's what the cell phone Internet connection is supposed to do for you.
--
Jim S

Andy Burns wrote:

>> My smartphone can do ALL the PIN/LOCK/ENCRYPT methods; I use none of them.
>> Why not?
>>
>> Because I'm not afraid of someone snatching my phone out of my hands.
>> That's why.
>
> And you're *so* sure of your ability to not drop it out your pocket or leave it
> behind somewhere?

Hi Andy,

Thank you for understanding that the question is a _serous_ question.
It's about using gimmicks to protect yourself from the wrong threat.

Despite the humor inherent in the question, I'm sure you understood that my
commentary is that everyone is hoodwinked by the likes of Apple/Google that
the "*BIG THREAT*" is someone snatching your phone out of your back pocket.

Physical access, clearly, is NOT what the "*BIG THREAT*" is.
By any stretch of the imagination, whether educated or ignorant.

The *BIG THREAT* is far worse than simply close-contact physical access.
However, to your question, I could respond with a very simple question:
Q: If they snatch my phone... what do they get?
A: A phone.

That's it.
They get my phone.

They don't get anything else.
a. They get my phone (which I got for free from T-Mobile)
b. They get my sdcard (which cost me about twenty bucks)
c. They get my phone case (another twenty bucks)
d. They get the twenty bucks underneath my phone case too!

What else do they get that is _on_ the phone?
A. They get my few contacts (mostly friends & family)
B. They get all my apps (they're all free apps anyway)
C. They get a few encrypted files of personal data (like my vaccine card)
D. They can connect to my Wi-Fi when they're within range

What else do they get?
You tell me.

Now I know you're going to say banking and email but I don't do banking on
a phone but I do email which I don't worry if someone accesses that and
besides, I have a PIN set per app that I want to set a pin for (which is
just about only one or two apps which I rarely use and that's the point).

Why lock something you use ALL the time where you NEED some kind of gimmick
like FaceID to make that onerous lock less onerous when you can just lock
the one or two apps on your phone which you use once a month or so?

It's a perfectly reasonable valid question of:
Q: Why use pure gimmicks like FaceID when that's NOT the real threat?

PS: The slum is humor designed to make a point about the threat level.
--
HINT: Bear in mind I have _zero_ logins on my phone.

On 8/24/22 11:27 PM, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> For those who use FaceID, I simply ask one obvious question:
>  *Which slum do you live in that you feel you _need_ FaceID anyway?*
>
> Me?
>
> I don't lock my doors or windows at night.
> My driveway gate has a latch you can reach around to walk in.
> The FedEx/UPS/Amazon guy has the gate code (the USPS won't use it though).
> My kids' extra unused cars are parked outside, always unlocked.
> My barn is left unlocked, as is the fence gate around the pool.
>
> My smartphone can do ALL the PIN/LOCK/ENCRYPT methods; I use none of them.
> Why not?
>
> Because I'm not afraid of someone snatching my phone out of my hands.
> That's why.
>
> I feel sorry for those of you who live in the slums where you _do_ have to
> worry about someone sneaking up behind you to snatch your phone away.
>
> Which brings up the obvious question for all who use FaceID gimmickry...
>  *Which slum do you live in that you feel you _need_ FaceID anyway?*

I stumbled across a study which found that Usenet posters with Obnoxious
Whiny Gadfly Personas were generally compensating for underdevelopment
of certain of their physical equipment.

Can't quite remember the exact cite or details...or I'd pass them on to
you ;-)

--
I fix stuff and I know things

Wade Garrett wrote:

> underdevelopment of certain of their physical equipment.

The fact remains that face-id is a gimmick that appeals to people.
*The _adult_ question is why?*

It's a valid _adult_ question to ponder why people are so fearful that they
fear every single person around them - even their own spouse and children.

Why?

What are they so afraid of that they fear EVERYONE so viscerally that they
feel they must add a gimmick to their phone just to _feel_ safe about it?

Where do they live that everyone around them is a physical threat to them?

Andy Burnelli wrote:

> Q: If they snatch my phone... what do they get?
> A: A phone.
> That's it.
> They get my phone.
>
> They don't get anything else.
> a. They get my phone (which I got for free from T-Mobile)
> b. They get my sdcard (which cost me about twenty bucks)
> c. They get my phone case (another twenty bucks)
> d. They get the twenty bucks underneath my phone case too!
>
> What else do they get that is _on_ the phone?
> A. They get my few contacts (mostly friends & family)
> B. They get all my apps (they're all free apps anyway)
> C. They get a few encrypted files of personal data (like my vaccine card)
> D. They can connect to my Wi-Fi when they're within range
>
> What else do they get?
> You tell me.

My phone itself is protected by fingerprint or swipe-pattern, but it is kept
unlocked when in proximity to certain bluetooth devices that don't leave my home.

Sensitive apps (online banking and my business accounting) are protected
individually by fingerprint, but that still leaves email which someone given
unlocked access to my phone could attempt to alter credentials of e.g. online
shopping accounts ... someone stealing a copy of my contacts could do a bit of
reputational damage, etc

So I do prefer to let the phone lock itself when it's away from home. No
inconvenience when at home, no worry when away from home ... what's not to like?

In article <te8b32$1qa9$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli
<spam@nospam.com> wrote:

> It's a valid _adult_ question to ponder why people are so fearful that they
> fear every single person around them - even their own spouse and children.

says the person who constantly nym-shifts, uses vpns and tor, spoofs
mac addresses and various other things.

>
> Where do they live that everyone around them is a physical threat to them?

santa cruz mountains, apparently.

nospam wrote:

>> Where do they live that everyone around them is a physical threat to them?
>
> santa cruz mountains, apparently.

*The _adult_ question to ask is what is everyone so physically afraid of.*

The _adult_ valid point is that the screenlock is there _BECAUSE_ people
are told to be physically afraid of everyone around them... right?

The _adult_ observation is that the Face-ID gimmick is merely to make that
constant screenlocking to be easier and faster on the user... right?

The _adult_ question isn't so much why is everyone stooping to the level of
a mere childish marketing gimmick just to unlock their phone constantly...

The _adult_ question to ask is what is everyone so physically afraid of.

*Where do you live that everyone around you is a physical threat to you?*

Andy Burns wrote:

> My phone itself is protected by fingerprint or swipe-pattern, but it is kept
> unlocked when in proximity to certain bluetooth devices that don't leave my home.

Hi Andy,

Thank you for taking the question seriously - as it is a very serious
problem that people are hoodwinked by MARKETING to do the wrong things.

As you are smart enough to comprehend, the question was asked in a way that
points out the utter absurdity of "needing" face-id just to make constant
locking/unlocking bearable for the average phone user such as you & I are.

While my phone will do them all, I don't use _any_ of them simply because a
physical threat to my phone by my family & friends is low on my threat
scale.

That you use a proximity geofence makes sense at least in terms of the
threat not being from your own spouse, kids, and visiting friends.

But what's the physical threat _outside_ the home?
Do you have a lock around your wallet for example?

What's different between your phone and your wallet in terms of threat?

My point is that physical threats are what MARKETING wants you to think are
the threat you're protecting against - when that's simply not true.

>
> Sensitive apps (online banking and my business accounting) are protected
> individually by fingerprint,

First off, if you have sensitive "stuff" on your phone, it's trivial to
protect that sensitive stuff with encryption - so I won't delve further.

As for the banking app itself, I'm pretty sure it requires some kind of
2FA/2SV such that a common thief wouldn't have _both_ verifications, right?

Hence banking and business accounting, as far as I can tell, should NOT be
a problem because they should _already_ be protected with their own
encryption.

For example, just store the data in a Truecrypt container and ALL the data
is safe & sound no matter who yanks your phone out of your hands, right?

> but that still leaves email which someone given
> unlocked access to my phone could attempt to alter credentials of e.g. online
> shopping accounts ...

As for email, there is an issue because many people sync automatically, in
which case it would be just opening the app itself which needs protection.

But if your phone were stolen, all you'd need to do is change your
verification credentials, and, as you're well aware, "most people" (not me,
but most people) are using 2FA/2SV anyway - so the thief has nothing,
right?

If email were really the problem, then all you'd need to do is protect that
email app (which is easily enough done) and not the entire phone, right?

My whole point is that marketing has hoodwinked people who stopped thinking
about what the real threat is - and it's not somone physically grabbing
your phone.

> someone stealing a copy of my contacts could do a bit of
> reputational damage, etc

As you are well aware, I don't keep _any_ contacts in the default sqlite
database location - so I'm well aware the biggest threat is OTHER PEOPLE
uploading my contacts to their login accounts (e.g., whatsapp, facebook,
whatever).

If contacts were so valuable, people would rebel against uploading them by
default (which is what the GMail app does on Android, for example).

And yet they don't.
So I don't really believe yet that people are "protecting" their contacts
by the constant locking/unlocking of their phone lock screen.

While I'm a scientist and an engineer so I am well aware that intuition is
often wrong, I'll believe almost anything if you give me a good reason.

Having said that, you'll need a convincing logical fact-based argument for
me to believe that people are putting up with constant lock/unlock of their
phone to protect their contacts when people seem to upload those same
contacts to many web sites without even blinking.

The point is that MARKETING wants you to believe physical access to your
contacts is the threat - when that's NOT the threat in the least.

>
> So I do prefer to let the phone lock itself when it's away from home. No
> inconvenience when at home, no worry when away from home ... what's not to like?

Do you know the moral of the emperor with no clothes story?
That's what's not to like about being told the threat is X when it's not.

When you're told by the phone maker that the threat is X and the phone
maker then provides solution Y - but both the threat and the solution are
fabricated by the phone maker's marketing team - that's what's not to like.

It's an adult viewpoint, is it not?
The main question is what are you protecting?

My point, which I brought up humorously, his that marketing has hoodwinked
people who stopped thinking. You and I need to think. What's the threat?

I propose that the only people who "should" need FaceID gimmickry,
are those people who literally live in the dank slums.

Otherwise, what are they so afraid of that every second they have to lock
their phone?

On 2022-08-25, Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> The fact remains that face-id is a gimmick that appeals to people.

That's clearly not a fact - just an opinion. You *really* struggle with
the difference. : D

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

Jolly Roger wrote:

>> The fact remains that face-id is a gimmick that appeals to people.
>
> That's clearly not a fact - just an opinion. You *really* struggle with
> the difference. : D

If FaceID is not a gimmick, Jolly Roger, then answer the _adult_ question.
*Why?*

Specifically...

What is the _physical_ threat you are so fearful of that makes you feel so
desperate a need to protect your lockscreen from the people around you?

On 2022-08-25, Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>>> The fact remains that face-id is a gimmick that appeals to people.
>>
>> That's clearly not a fact - just an opinion. You *really* struggle
>> with the difference. : D
>
> If FaceID is not a gimmick

Your opinion is not a fact, trollboi. : )

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

Jolly Roger wrote:

>> If FaceID is not a gimmick
>
> Your opinion is not a fact, trollboi. : )

The fact is faceid exists, JR, for people living in abject physical fear.
*The _adult_ question is why*

Specifically...
*Where do FaceID proponents live that they feel such abject physical fear?*

On 2022-08-25, Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>>> If FaceID is not a gimmick
>>
>> Your opinion is not a fact, trollboi. : )
>
> The fact is faceid exists

No shit, Sherlock.
Big Brain™ Andy over here... : D

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

Jolly Roger wrote:

> No shit, Sherlock.

Think about it.
From an _adult_ perspective, Jolly Roger...

The marketing people _create_ this fear you feel about everyone around you.
Then, they create their _solution_ to that fear from all who surround you.

It's genius.

On 25/08/2022 19:54, Andy Burnelli wrote:

> As for the banking app itself, I'm pretty sure it requires some kind of
> 2FA/2SV such that a common thief wouldn't have _both_ verifications, right?

I don't use my cellphone for online banking. When I use my home computer
for that, the 2FA code is sent to my cellphone. Where is the 2FA code
sent to if the cellphone app is used for banking?

--

Jeff

Jeff Layman wrote:

>> As for the banking app itself, I'm pretty sure it requires some kind of
>> 2FA/2SV such that a common thief wouldn't have _both_ verifications, right?
>
> I don't use my cellphone for online banking. When I use my home computer
> for that, the 2FA code is sent to my cellphone. Where is the 2FA code
> sent to if the cellphone app is used for banking?

Hi Jeff,

You bring up a good question about 2FA/2SV where my observation is that
a. The MARKETING teams manufactured a fake threat of "everyone" around you
b. Then MARKETING (conveniently) provided a bogus "solution" of FACE-ID

*If we live in the slums, then, of course, we _need_ the face-id gimmick*
(Otherwise constantly unlocking the phone becomes an onerous nuisance.)

The first problem we have to resolve is whether or not every single person
who surrounds you is so much of a dire physical threat that you need the
faceid gimmickry that the marketing teams are so desperate to claim you do.

I propose that if you live in the slums, so to speak, then yes.
If you live in the slums, then everyone around you is a physical threat.

If you live in slums, you _need_ something like faceid just to make the
locks on your door manageable since you live in constant physical fear.

But your question is different which is what happens when your spouse, your
kids, your friends, and your neigbors do _grab_ your phone out of your
hands.

I don't know.
Nobody ever stole my phone from me.

We need to ask the people with FaceID what happens when, presumably almost
daily they are getting the phone pulled out of their hands by passersby.

Seems to me if you have a banking app, you just call the bank and tell them
to _change_ the 2SV/2FV but I'll defer to people who actually use 2SV/2FA.

Since neither you nor I use banking apps on the phone, let's see what the
answer is for WHERE 2FV/2SV codes are sent if you use the phone to bank.
--
I ask questions that are those questions an adult would ask of smartphones.

In article <te9reu$3tqpe$1@dont-email.me>, Jeff Layman
<Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>
> I don't use my cellphone for online banking. When I use my home computer
> for that, the 2FA code is sent to my cellphone. Where is the 2FA code
> sent to if the cellphone app is used for banking?

if it's an sms, it goes to the cellphone, the same as it normally does.

sms codes are not 2fa and is actually worse since sms is not secure.

totp codes can be generated on a computer or phone, eliminating sms
entirely. it's both more convenient *and* more secure, not the usual
combination.

nospam wrote:

>> I don't use my cellphone for online banking. When I use my home computer
>> for that, the 2FA code is sent to my cellphone. Where is the 2FA code
>> sent to if the cellphone app is used for banking?
>
> if it's an sms, it goes to the cellphone, the same as it normally does.
>
> sms codes are not 2fa and is actually worse since sms is not secure.
>
> totp codes can be generated on a computer or phone, eliminating sms
> entirely. it's both more convenient *and* more secure, not the usual
> combination.

It's an adult question to ask...
*Why do you need ANY screen protection when each app can protect itself.*

Assuming nospam's answer is correct (he's usually correct when he's not
defending Apple's flaws to the death, by the way), then your banking app is
likely protected already from theft if/when people live in the slums.

The point is simple but it takes _adult_ cognitive skills to comprehend:
1. If you feel you _need_ FACE-ID - you have to ask yourself why.
2. The MARKETING of FACEID is, essentially, that you live in the slums.

If you truly do live in the slums, then by all means, you need all the
gimmicks you can get your hands on to protect yourself from all those
people who surround you that you fear will physically snatch your phone.

FACE-ID is a gimmick.
Face-Id is a gimmick for people who live in abject fear.
Face-iD is a gimmick for people who live in abject fear in the inner slums.

Why not just protect the one or two apps that you want protection on
instead of constantly needing to unlock your phone to protect yourself from
a dire physical threat that you may feel the desperate need for but which
doesn't actually exist...

MARKETING created that need.
It doesn't exist otherwise.

Unless, of course, you really do live in the slums.

On 2022-08-25 20:31, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> nospam wrote:
>
>>> Where do they live that everyone around them is a physical threat to
>>> them?
>>
>> santa cruz mountains, apparently.
>
> *The _adult_ question to ask is what is everyone so physically afraid of.*
>
> The _adult_ valid point is that the screenlock is there _BECAUSE_ people
> are told to be physically afraid of everyone around them... right?
>
> The _adult_ observation is that the Face-ID gimmick is merely to make that
> constant screenlocking to be easier and faster on the user... right?
>
> The _adult_ question isn't so much why is everyone stooping to the level of
> a mere childish marketing gimmick just to unlock their phone constantly...
> The _adult_ question to ask is what is everyone so physically afraid of.
>
> *Where do you live that everyone around you is a physical threat to you?*

Dunno, but everybody in the USA wears a gun to defend from attackers
that may jump at them any instant.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 2022-08-26 09:07, Jeff Layman wrote:
> On 25/08/2022 19:54, Andy Burnelli wrote:
>
>> As for the banking app itself, I'm pretty sure it requires some kind of
>> 2FA/2SV such that a common thief wouldn't have _both_ verifications,
>> right?
>
> I don't use my cellphone for online banking. When I use my home computer
> for that, the 2FA code is sent to my cellphone. Where is the 2FA code
> sent to if the cellphone app is used for banking?
>

To the app as well. Here it appears in a pop-up, and it automatically
fills up. Or you have to tap and drag the code from the pop up to the
prompt.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

Carlos E.R. wrote:

>> *Where do you live that everyone around you is a physical threat to you?*
>
> Dunno, but everybody in the USA wears a gun to defend from attackers
> that may jump at them any instant.

I don't even own a gun but I don't begrudge those that do own a gun as it's
a right that is intended to keep government honest because we don't want to
happen what did happen in Spain, Germany, Italy, Austria, etc. in the past.

In the USA, the people should be stronger, as a whole, than the government.

Having said that, it's my _adult_ point of view that FACE-ID is:
a. A (an admittedly brilliant) gimmick _crafted_ purely by MARKETING
b. To make people _physically_ fearful of every single person around them
c. Such that they feel _desperate_ for the need to have a fast screenlock

The _adult_ question is simply whether or not you _need_ that gimmick.
Do you?
Why?
--
Note you can protect any given app with its own app pin which works fine.