this post was submitted on 08 May 2026
165 points (95.6% liked)
Cybersecurity
9939 readers
155 users here now
c/cybersecurity is a community centered on the cybersecurity and information security profession. You can come here to discuss news, post something interesting, or just chat with others.
THE RULES
Instance Rules
- Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
- No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
- No Ads / Spamming.
- No pornography.
Community Rules
- Idk, keep it semi-professional?
- Nothing illegal. We're all ethical here.
- Rules will be added/redefined as necessary.
If you ask someone to hack your "friends" socials you're just going to get banned so don't do that.
Learn about hacking
Other security-related communities !databreaches@lemmy.zip !netsec@lemmy.world !securitynews@infosec.pub !cybersecurity@infosec.pub !pulse_of_truth@infosec.pub
Notable mention to !cybersecuritymemes@lemmy.world
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think this is a pretty naive risk analysis. Hackers cracking my lemmy password is the least of my concerns. Having my biometric data leaked is one of my highest ones.
I think Gunner means a biometrically unlocked second factor like a Yubikey or a smartphone's user attestation. Given how badly written the entire article is, I wouldn't be confused if that's what he originally said before they condensed his statement beyond comprehension.
Yubikeys are still not biometric unless you're buying the super-super expensive one. They are just very secure MFA. (in that it's extremely hard to read the secrets from them even with physical access)
Don't they just spit out the long password when you press them, I'd figure it would be easy to just plug it into your phone and copy the output if you had physical access
It's OTP. Once a code has been seen, all the previous ones no longer work. There's no point in copying.
There's a second slot that can be used for static passwords. But don't, obviously.
That is but one method of Yubikey. They also support cryptographic passkeys and can store TOTP secrets as well as PGP crypto keys.
The "touch key random key" is a OTP code that can be used for legacy software, Passkey and/or other functions are more valuable to me. Can read more about OTP security here.
Biometric is the worst lmao
Passkeys or hardware based security keys is where it's at
Wouldn't biometric data be sensor/implementation specific. I doubt the fingerprint data stored on an iPhone is the same as the one stored on an Xperia.
Your fingerprint is your fingerprint. If its possible to extract the raw data, then that can be reconstructed into your fingerprint...
Fingerprint readers don’t store a raw copy of your fingerprint, to use a bad analogy: it’s like a biometric hash.
in the early 2000s when fingerprint readers started getting popular, my coworker and I decided to test them...
super glue fumes, printer toner and scotch tape. that's all that was ever needed to bypass the reader once you could isolate a good spot where someones finger left a good mark. like from drinking glass or a door knob
I'm not sure if I'd ever trust a fingerprint to fully be a secure passkey
I would not trust it as a single factor, but 2FA should always be something you have+something you know, biometeics is more of a "something you ARE", which is unchangeable.
Also I hear you can be compelled by the police to unlock biometric locks.
That's the thing - it's not possible. The fingerprint is only ever stored within the fingerprint module, with no method for retrieval. The only thing the phone sees is "did this person scan a matching fingerprint or not?"
I don't think that means it cannot be leaked
Yeah, but what would you do with it? Can you convert the bytes to work on any other sensor the victim may also use their fingerprint? Never looked into the real implementation details of the fingerprint hardware.
Sometimes you can. Or just bruteforce a colliding pattern that matches to print that instead, because why not