Identity cannot be changed if compromised.
As a second form of authentication it is fine, but as a single form alone it is a bad idea.
Ideally you would always have two of these:
* Something you know (i.e. password)
* Something you have (i.e. yubikey or a token generator on your phone)
* Something you are (i.e. fingerprint)
But if you must have only one of these then the weakest one is something you are as, if compromised, it can never be changed.
Like in the USA, the social security numbers, our driver license numbers, etc. are all used as authentication, when originally were meant as identification for tracking purposes.
So far, the safest form seems to be what we keep in our heads.
The SSN certainly, but I don't think I've ever been asked for my DL number for authentication rather than identification. Maybe I've just forgotten. When did it happen to you?
Yes.
> Identity cannot be changed if compromised.
I'm not up to date at what's possible with plastic surgery, but in this specific case I think it's doable (new fingerprints).
> As a second form of authentication it is fine, but as a single form alone it is a bad idea.
I don't consider it authentication. More like a record locator.
> But if you must have only one of these then the weakest one is something you are as, if compromised, it can never be changed.
I think a lot of this "fingerprints as authentication" stuff will go away once situations like this become commonplace: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11726108
Maybe you don't, but a lot of others do. Like, Apple.
In addition with PINs you can have diagonally opposite numbers (e.g. 1-9 or 3-7) but with patterns you don't have that unless you use 5 on the way (e.g. 1-5-9 or 3-5-7). In fact most people will have the central dot in their pattern recognition somewhere in the middle just through human nature.
Yep. Either that or just the classic double circle.
well, we should change the Minister