The legal situation is more complex and nuanced than the headline implies, so the article is worth reading. This adds another ruling to the confusing case history regarding forced biometric unlocking.

  • refalo
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago
    edit-2
    6 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    I think this solution is way too impractical for most people, who tend to unlock their phone many times a day.

    • NauticalNoodle
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      6 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      Yeah, that’s the cost of good security practices. You always sacrifice convenience.

      • HumanPersonEnglish
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        6 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        I wish I could have a fingerprint and a pin with a limited number of attempts. Plus a password after like three failed pin attempts. I think that would be a pretty good balance between security and convenience.

    • OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      6 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      I mean, it is annoying. But it’s security. Don’t want people having access to your device, remove all possibility someone CAN.

      But it is annoying, we shouldn’t HAVE to do this. Privacy should be baked right into our daily lives and not clawed out with tired hands every chance we get.

      • TaviRiderOP
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        6 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        Yeah. The huge legal distinctions between different ways of unlocking a device seem absurd. Comprehensive privacy legislation would help.