There were a lot of complaints from some people early on about unreliable
fingerprint recognition but I never had an issue even with a screen
protector in place. Over the months Google issued a few patches to "fix"
the problems which I didn't experience. Eventually I noticed that with each
fix the reader's accuracy got worse. This morning I was clever enough to
erase all of the memorized prints and start over. It worked. The reader now
seems to be flawless for me once more. Just an idea for anybody else who is
experiencing problems (but before you do it make sure that you actually
know what your PIN or pattern is and that they work).

--
Noli sinere pessimi nequissimique te tristificare!

John McGaw wrote:

> There were a lot of complaints from some people early on about unreliable
> fingerprint recognition

I went with a Pixel 5a for a combination of reasons (rear fingerprint sensor, no
fugly camera visor, cheaper)

Am 09.04.22 um 16:27 schrieb John McGaw:
> There were a lot of complaints from some people early on about unreliable
> fingerprint recognition but I never had an issue even with a screen
> protector in place. Over the months Google issued a few patches to "fix"
> the problems which I didn't experience. Eventually I noticed that with each
> fix the reader's accuracy got worse. This morning I was clever enough to
> erase all of the memorized prints and start over. It worked. The reader now
> seems to be flawless for me once more. Just an idea for anybody else who is
> experiencing problems (but before you do it make sure that you actually
> know what your PIN or pattern is and that they work).

The older you get the less distinctive the fingerprints become.
Fingerprints are not 100 % stable. Over time fingerprints get harder to
identify.

What also helps is to store the most used fingerprint twice. That also
increases hit rate massively.

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Am 09.04.22 um 17:03 schrieb Andy Burns:
> John McGaw wrote:
>
>> There were a lot of complaints from some people early on about unreliable
>> fingerprint recognition
>
> I went with a Pixel 5a for a combination of reasons (rear fingerprint sensor, no
> fugly camera visor, cheaper)

My Pixel 4 recognises my face. Still the fastest way to identfy a person.

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Andy Burns wrote:

>> There were a lot of complaints from some people early on about unreliable
>> fingerprint recognition
>
> I went with a Pixel 5a for a combination of reasons (rear fingerprint sensor, no
> fugly camera visor, cheaper)

Like most Android phones, my free A32-5G does _all_ the lockscreen methods.
a. fingerprint
b. pin
c. pattern
d. face

But I don't use _any_ of them.
Why?

All security is a tradeoff between what the threat is, and how inconvenient
the security is, right?

What's the threat?
How many people are sneaking up behind you to snatch your phone from your
hands versus the number of people world wide who can hack into your phone or
worse, who can hack into your data that you store on the cloud?

To me, the threat is clearly in _this order_ of priority:
A. Anything of yours (including your meta data) being stored on the Internet
B. Your phone just being connected to the Internet
C. Your phone

What I don't understand is _why_ people lock the phone given that's the
lowest priority of all (if you're not doing illegal things which I'm
presuming a priori none of us are doing so let's forget that issue).

I get it that people have "private conversations", but there are plenty of
easy ways to lock them (my free messaging app has that feature but even if
it didn't, you can lock individual apps with a pin or pattern if you like).

I also get it that there is a flaw in the GMail app (which is what I suppose
many people use) which doesn't have its own login/password challenge
(AFAIK), but that can be added via any of the app-specific lock apps too.

I also get it that people have "banking" apps and the like, but don't _all_
of those require already additional security (e.g., login/passwd or 2FA)?

And I get it that people have "media" that they might want to protect from
prying eyes, where the ".nomedia" probably isn't sufficient but they can use
a truecrypt/veracrypt compatible encryption container for data storage.

I also get it that all of that stuff is inconvenient in its own way also,
but, for me, I don't have _any_ of that stuff, so I don't even need that
inconvenience (e.g., anyone who steals my pictures will be bored to death).

My main question is why do people lock their phone if (and that's assumed),
if they don't have people following them from behind ready to grab it out of
their hands?

Why bother?

It's a serious question given it's "some" hassle (even if it's only a little
hassle) where I decry when people "think" that's all they need to be "safe".

Isn't it a better approach to harden the phone & data from the Internet?
--
(The vastly bigger threat to your data is elsewhere.)

On 4/9/2022 9:21 AM, Andy Burnelli wrote:

> why do people lock their phone if (and that's assumed), if they don't
> have people following them from behind ready to grab it out of their
> hands?

I lock my phone to protect it against ME. I sometimes can't even
remember where I left it in the house. One of these days I may lose it
when out. That phone lock protects me from my unlocked Google apps being
opened by the finder. Once I realize the phone is gone I can remotely
change my Google password and disable the phone. (All my other sensitive
apps have their own passwords.) Hopefully the finder is honest and calls
the wife's phone to return it. I have her number on the lock screen
after "If found please call"...

Andy Burnelli wrote:

> Like most Android phones, my free A32-5G does _all_ the lockscreen methods.
> a. fingerprint
> b. pin
> c. pattern
> d. face
>
> But I don't use _any_ of them.

Given that I have to use my fingers to pick up the phone, having a fingerprint
reader on the back means my finger is automatically in place, the unlocking is
perhaps 1/3 of a second, I had this on the pixel3 so was keen not to have to use
a slower(?) front fingerprint reader on a Pixel6

I thought that face unlock was considered unsafe without the "radar" of earlier
Pixel phones or speckle of dots like an iPhone?

In article <jbduinF8c8aU1@mid.individual.net>, Andy Burns
<usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

> I thought that face unlock was considered unsafe without the "radar" of
> earlier Pixel phones or speckle of dots like an iPhone?

both use a dot projector. the soli radar was to detect the presence of
a face, at which point the dot projector illuminates and the system
then verifies the face. iphones use a different method of proximity
detection.

they are the only secure method of face unlock. the rest can easily be
spoofed with a photo.

nospam wrote:

> they are the only secure method of face unlock

Face unlock is nothing more or less than a silly marketing gimmick.
People consider their face is uniquely personal & that's why it works.

Almost all these marketing gimmicks prey on such misplaced user vanity.

The _real_ threat to a phone isn't some guy stealing it out of your hands.
Unless you live in the slums, that is (but I don't).

Apple's security is so atrocious that they want to take your mind off of
what the true threat is to an iPhone (given so many zero-day holes in iOS).

Apple has so many zero-day holes that they _add_ those holes at the rate of
at least once a month for the past three years in a row (and those are only
those few zero-day holes in iOS that are _reported_ to Apple by others).

As you said, misplaced user vanity works especially well on the iPhone.
--
You can't make those ungody profit margins off of intelligent customers.

On 4/9/2022 8:03 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
> John McGaw wrote:
>
>> There were a lot of complaints from some people early on about
>> unreliable fingerprint recognition
>
> I went with a Pixel 5a for a combination of reasons (rear fingerprint
> sensor, no fugly camera visor, cheaper)

I prefer the rear fingerprint sensor as well. It's faster and more
natural to be unlocking your phone with one hand rather than holding the
phone in one hand and touching the under-screen fingerprint sensor with
the other hand.

Especially during Covid, the FaceID on iPhones has been especially
annoying. At least on the 12 and 13 Apple now has a way to use FaceID
without masks, but the 12 and 13 don't make up the majority of iPhones
in use so people are still using the passcode. In my area, like most
places, the mask mandates have ended, but in my area most people still
wear masks when inside a store so the FaceID issue persists.

Andy Burns wrote:

> Given that I have to use my fingers to pick up the phone, having a fingerprint
> reader on the back means my finger is automatically in place, the unlocking is
> perhaps 1/3 of a second

Thanks for letting me know that your reason is that it's simple enough, and,
for that I don't disagree. It's simple enough to lock a car door too, and
when I am at the mall I _do_ lock my car doors; but not when I'm at home.

As you know, I spend my energy securing my phone from Internet threats to
security/privacy, so I'm all for securing a phone from the likely threats.

But what's the likelihood of someone stealing your phone out of your hands?

sms wrote:

> Apple now has a way to use FaceID without masks

We covered this in detail on the iOS newsgroup but the Android people might
not know that all Apple did for the iPhone 12 & 13 is _reduce_ the faceid
area.

Yup.

All Apple did, essentially, was NOT look at _most_ of your face.
It was easy for them since it's just a marketing gimmick after all.

So now it's a gimmick that also works when almost all your face is occluded.
(Think about that.)
--
You can't make those undgodly profit margins off an intelligent customer.

On 4/9/2022 9:59 AM, AJL wrote:

<snip>

> Hopefully the finder is honest and calls
> the wife's phone to return it. I have her number on the lock screen
> after "If found please call"...

Surprising how many Android owners don't bother to add contact
information to the lock screen since it's so easy to do, though the
place to do this in Settings keeps changing. On my latest Android device
it's Settings > Display > Advanced > Lock Screen > Add text on lock screen.

Oddly, you can't do this, at least not directly, on the iPhone, you have
to create a JPEG of wallpaper that has your contact information then set
your lock screen wallpaper to that image
<https://www.lifewire.com/add-contact-info-to-lock-screen-wallpaper-1701950>.
I did this on my iPhone and one of my nieces saw my phone last Xmas and
asked me how to do this and I launched into the explanation as she
rolled her eyes, but she did do it.

You can easily add contact information to your iPhone in your medical
information that someone can get to without unlocking the phone (swipe
up, tap on "Emergency" then tap on "Medical ID"). But someone finding
your lost phone is unlikely to know this.

On Nextdoor, there are often posts like "I found an iPhone while hiking
and I need to find the owner." I've never seen a similar post for an
Android phone, but I live in an area where iPhones predominate (we have
a really big fruit company in my city!).

On 09/04/2022 20:31, sms wrote:

> I prefer the rear fingerprint sensor as well.

I do except when my phone is flat on my desk and I want to unlock it
without picking it up, which is a lot more often than I realised before
I got a phone with a rear fingerprint sensor.

In article <t2smv3$efh$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> Especially during Covid, the FaceID on iPhones has been especially
> annoying.

originally, but apple has addressed that issue three times.

> At least on the 12 and 13 Apple now has a way to use FaceID
> without masks,

false.

iphone x and later supports face id without masks.

iphone x and later supports face id with masks and an apple watch.

iphone 12 & 13 support face id with masks without an apple watch.

> but the 12 and 13 don't make up the majority of iPhones

you have no idea what portion of iphones they are, nor does it matter.

the fact is that apple addressed the issue.

> in use so people are still using the passcode.

no they aren't.

In article <t2sp2k$ut3$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> Surprising how many Android owners don't bother to add contact
> information to the lock screen since it's so easy to do, though the
> place to do this in Settings keeps changing. On my latest Android device
> it's Settings > Display > Advanced > Lock Screen > Add text on lock screen.

there's nothing surprising about that as most people don't want their
own information on the lockscreen, for all sorts of reasons.

....

> Oddly, you can't do this, at least not directly, on the iPhone, you have
> to create a JPEG of wallpaper that has your contact information then set
> your lock screen wallpaper to that image

that is false. adding contact information to an ios device can be done
in several ways, including pushed to the phone by the original owner
after having been lost or stolen.

On 04/09/2022 12:31 PM, sms wrote:
> On 4/9/2022 8:03 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
>> John McGaw wrote:
>>
>>> There were a lot of complaints from some people early on about
>>> unreliable fingerprint recognition
>>
>> I went with a Pixel 5a for a combination of reasons (rear fingerprint
>> sensor, no fugly camera visor, cheaper)
>
> I prefer the rear fingerprint sensor as well. It's faster and more
> natural to be unlocking your phone with one hand rather than holding the
> phone in one hand and touching the under-screen fingerprint sensor with
> the other hand.

I have my Pixel2 screen set to blank after one minute in the vain hope
of saving the battery. Having to push the ON button is itself a
nuisance, much less having to do yet another thing (touch the
fingerprint thing on the back, do some sort of weird swipe or even look
into the screen in the hope it would recognize me). Plus, based on the
fingerprint reader at the gym, I figure that sooner or later that's
going to fail and I'll have a dead phone.

> Especially during Covid, the FaceID on iPhones has been especially
> annoying. At least on the 12 and 13 Apple now has a way to use FaceID
> without masks, but the 12 and 13 don't make up the majority of iPhones
> in use so people are still using the passcode. In my area, like most
> places, the mask mandates have ended, but in my area most people still
> wear masks when inside a store so the FaceID issue persists.

Given that the phone restarts by itself every once in a while, I think
my distrust is justified.

--
Cheers, Bev
"I never understood why anyone would go to the trouble to write a novel
when you can just go out and buy one for a few bucks." -- lpogoda

On 04/09/2022 01:07 PM, sms wrote:

> On Nextdoor, there are often posts like "I found an iPhone while hiking
> and I need to find the owner." I've never seen a similar post for an
> Android phone, but I live in an area where iPhones predominate (we have
> a really big fruit company in my city!).

I posit that something might be said about the IQs of users of those
phones, but my daughter (who is really smart) uses iPhones.
Accordingly, I suspect that people use whatever they started with -- and
iPhones were what her local provider was giving out.

--
Cheers, Bev
"I never understood why anyone would go to the trouble to write a novel
when you can just go out and buy one for a few bucks." -- lpogoda

The Real Bev wrote:

> I posit that something might be said about the IQs of users of those
> phones, but my daughter (who is really smart) uses iPhones.
> Accordingly, I suspect that people use whatever they started with -- and
> iPhones were what her local provider was giving out.

Apple has the finest marketing on earth (along with the lowest R&D in tech).

I have kids & grandkids in my own family who love iPhones where I've said
before I ask everyone I know (and even plenty in the Costco checkout) _why_
and what I get tells me a _lot_ about their susceptibility to propaganda.

It's the same propaganda that is spit out by the people in the Costco gas
station when I ask why they are putting high test into their Honda Accord.

Given this is an Android newsgroup, I should mention what the propaganda is
for Android but, for the life of me, offhand, I can't think of any.

What bullshit propaganda do the Android makers spew to spur Android sales?

On 2022-04-10 1:45 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> The Real Bev wrote:
>
>> I posit that something might be said about the IQs of users of those
>> phones, but my daughter (who is really smart) uses iPhones.
>> Accordingly, I suspect that people use whatever they started with --
>> and iPhones were what her local provider was giving out.
>
> Apple has the finest marketing on earth (along with the lowest R&D in
> tech).

Why must you lie, Arlen?

>
> I have kids & grandkids in my own family who love iPhones where I've said
> before I ask everyone I know (and even plenty in the Costco checkout) _why_
> and what I get tells me a _lot_ about their susceptibility to propaganda.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <t2smv3$efh$1@dont-email.me>, sms
> <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Especially during Covid, the FaceID on iPhones has been especially
>> annoying.
>
> originally, but apple has addressed that issue three times.
>
>> At least on the 12 and 13 Apple now has a way to use FaceID
>> without masks,
>
> false.
>
> iphone x and later supports face id without masks.
>
> iphone x and later supports face id with masks and an apple watch.
>
> iphone 12 & 13 support face id with masks without an apple watch.
>
>> but the 12 and 13 don't make up the majority of iPhones
>
> you have no idea what portion of iphones they are, nor does it matter.
>
> the fact is that apple addressed the issue.

They've *tried* to address the issue. It is still a problem for many.

>> in use so people are still using the passcode.
>
> no they aren't.

Yes they are. Anyone wearing a mask who doesn't own an iphone 12 or 13
can't use faceid so has to use the passcode. The apple watch fix, as I
recently found out, only works for the lock screen and so doesn't solve the
issues with faceid in all the apps that use it.

sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 4/9/2022 9:59 AM, AJL wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Hopefully the finder is honest and calls
>> the wife's phone to return it. I have her number on the lock screen
>> after "If found please call"...
>
> Surprising how many Android owners don't bother to add contact
> information to the lock screen since it's so easy to do, though the
> place to do this in Settings keeps changing. On my latest Android device
> it's Settings > Display > Advanced > Lock Screen > Add text on lock screen.
>
> Oddly, you can't do this, at least not directly, on the iPhone, you have
> to create a JPEG of wallpaper that has your contact information then set
> your lock screen wallpaper to that image
> <https://www.lifewire.com/add-contact-info-to-lock-screen-wallpaper-1701950>.
> I did this on my iPhone and one of my nieces saw my phone last Xmas and
> asked me how to do this and I launched into the explanation as she
> rolled her eyes, but she did do it.

Look up Lost Mode. Much better way than permanently making your personal
information public.

> You can easily add contact information to your iPhone in your medical
> information that someone can get to without unlocking the phone (swipe
> up, tap on "Emergency" then tap on "Medical ID"). But someone finding
> your lost phone is unlikely to know this.

Medical professionals definitely do. Which is the point of medical info.

> On Nextdoor, there are often posts like "I found an iPhone while hiking
> and I need to find the owner." I've never seen a similar post for an
> Android phone, but I live in an area where iPhones predominate (we have
> a really big fruit company in my city!).
>

On 4/10/2022 11:36 PM, Chris wrote:

<snip>

> Yes they are. Anyone wearing a mask who doesn't own an iphone 12 or 13
> can't use faceid so has to use the passcode. The apple watch fix, as I
> recently found out, only works for the lock screen and so doesn't solve the
> issues with faceid in all the apps that use it.

That is correct. Remember, the majority of iPhone users are using an
iPhone without TouchID, without FaceID that works with masks, and
without an Apple Watch. Within the next two years or so, that will
change as more users upgrade from the X, Xr, Xs, and 11. As we've seen
in the past few days, Covid is far from over and mask mandates may
return more widely soon due to the XE variant. But mandate or not, mask
use still remains high in many areas.

Am 11.04.22 um 08:36 schrieb Chris:
> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> In article <t2smv3$efh$1@dont-email.me>, sms
>>> in use so people are still using the passcode.
>>
>> no they aren't.
>
> Yes they are. Anyone wearing a mask who doesn't own an iphone 12 or 13
> can't use faceid so has to use the passcode. The apple watch fix, as I
> recently found out, only works for the lock screen and so doesn't solve the
> issues with faceid in all the apps that use it.

That is absolutely correct. Apple watch is used by a very small
minority of iPhone-users. Therefore this fix is not really of practical
relevance.

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

On 4/10/2022 11:47 PM, Chris wrote:
> sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>> On 4/9/2022 9:59 AM, AJL wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Hopefully the finder is honest and calls
>>> the wife's phone to return it. I have her number on the lock screen
>>> after "If found please call"...
>>
>> Surprising how many Android owners don't bother to add contact
>> information to the lock screen since it's so easy to do, though the
>> place to do this in Settings keeps changing. On my latest Android device
>> it's Settings > Display > Advanced > Lock Screen > Add text on lock screen.
>>
>> Oddly, you can't do this, at least not directly, on the iPhone, you have
>> to create a JPEG of wallpaper that has your contact information then set
>> your lock screen wallpaper to that image
>> <https://www.lifewire.com/add-contact-info-to-lock-screen-wallpaper-1701950>.
>> I did this on my iPhone and one of my nieces saw my phone last Xmas and
>> asked me how to do this and I launched into the explanation as she
>> rolled her eyes, but she did do it.
>
> Look up Lost Mode. Much better way than permanently making your personal
> information public.
>
>> You can easily add contact information to your iPhone in your medical
>> information that someone can get to without unlocking the phone (swipe
>> up, tap on "Emergency" then tap on "Medical ID"). But someone finding
>> your lost phone is unlikely to know this.
>
> Medical professionals definitely do. Which is the point of medical info.

Well exactly, but someone finding an iPhone on the trail may not know to
even look for the identity of the user by going through all that, and
the user may not know to enter his contact information there. That's why
it's a good idea to put your contact information on the lock screen.
It's odd that Apple has not followed the lead of Android and added this
capability.