UCHastings Instagram

          UC Hastings Moot Court goes three rounds at Prince Evidence Competition, brings home major hardware.
          Instagram Photo Likes sunny__mann, fashionesq, esalg_002 and 21 others like this.
          Thursday, September 12, 2013

          Adjunct Professor Marcia Hofmann on the iPhone's New Fingerprint ID

          Hofmann looks at the legal implications of Apple's new identification system in this opinion piece in Wired, Sept. 12, 2013.

          There’s a lot of talk around biometric authentication since Apple introduced its newest iPhone, which will let users unlock their device with a fingerprint. Given Apple’s industry-leading position, it’s probably not a far stretch to expect this kind of authentication to take off. Some even argue that Apple’s move is a death knell for authenticators based on what a user knows (like passwords and PIN numbers).

          While there’s a great deal of discussion around the pros and cons of fingerprint authentication — from the hackability of the technique to the reliability of readers — no one’s focusing on the legal effects of moving from PINs to fingerprints.

          Because the constitutional protection of the Fifth Amendment, which guarantees that “no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,” may not apply when it comes to biometric-based fingerprints (things that reflect who we are) as opposed to memory-based passwords and PINs (things we need to know and remember).

          Biometric authentication may make it easier for normal, everyday users to protect the data on their phones. But as wonderful as technological innovation is, it sometimes creates unintended consequences — including legal ones. If Apple’s move leads us to abandon knowledge-based authentication altogether, we risk inadvertently undermining the legal rights we currently enjoy under the Fifth Amendment.

          Here’s an easy fix: give users the option to unlock their phones with a fingerprint plus something the user knows.

          Read the full piece from Wired here. Follow Hofmann on Twitter at @marciahofmann

           

          Go to News Archive

          Share this Story

          Share via Facebook
          Share via TwitterShare via EmailPrint Friendly Version

          Other Recent Stories/ RSS

          Friday, April 17, 2015

          3Ls Hayley Reynolds & Daniel Zarchy Win at Ninth Circuit

          Case presents novel issue of whether witness tampering is categorically a crime involving moral turpitude for purposes of federal immigration proceedings, writes Stephen Tollafield, Professor & Associate Director, Legal Writing & Moot Court Department.
          Thursday, April 16, 2015

          HAP Students Argue Police Evasion Case at Ninth Circuit

          3Ls Gregory Michael and Dorothy Yamamoto argued their pro bono case, Medina Nunez v. Holder.
          Thursday, April 16, 2015

          Thinkers & Doers: April 16, 2015

          UC Hastings community members in the news and making moves,  April 10, 2015 - April 16, 2015.
          Friday, April 10, 2015

          UC Hastings Legacy Society Celebrates at "A View From Above" Reception

          Photos and more from the Legacy Society's "A View From Above" reception, hosted by Trustee Betsy England '78.
          Thursday, April 09, 2015

          Feldman and Frondorf: Patent Trolls Are Crashing The IPO Party

          Professor Robin Feldman and Research Fellow Evan Frondorf have published a new study demonstrating that companies are often approached by patent trolls shortly before or after an IPO.
          Go to News Archive