.
What this MEANS in such situations, is that you will be unable to "plead the Fifth Amendment" (which (in simple terms) states you can't be compelled to testify against yourself).
I believe this ruling sets a legal precedent that applies to ANY biometric access controls (e.g. eye/retina, chemical, facial recognition, etc)
AND it applies to "key"-based systems such as those that require a device such as a USB stick (or file on that stick), a ring or bracelet, or phone (e.g. NFC).
That includes REAL-ID cards/technology.
The following should come as no surprise.
What this MEANS in such situations, is that you will be unable to "plead the Fifth Amendment" (which (in simple terms) states you can't be compelled to testify against yourself).
I believe this ruling sets a legal precedent that applies to ANY biometric access controls (e.g. eye/retina, chemical, facial recognition, etc)
AND it applies to "key"-based systems such as those that require a device such as a USB stick (or file on that stick), a ring or bracelet, or phone (e.g. NFC).
That includes REAL-ID cards/technology.
http://www.macrumors.com/2014/10/31/fingerprints-not-protected...amendment/
A Circuit Court judge in Virginia has ruled that fingerprints are not protected by the Fifth Amendment, a decision that has clear privacy implications for fingerprint-protected devices like newer iPhones and iPads.
According to Judge Steven C. Fucci, while a criminal defendant can't be compelled to hand over a passcode to police officers for the purpose of unlocking a cellular device, law enforcement officials can compel a defendant to give up a fingerprint.
A Circuit Court judge in Virginia has ruled that fingerprints are not protected by the Fifth Amendment, a decision that has clear privacy implications for fingerprint-protected devices like newer iPhones and iPads.
According to Judge Steven C. Fucci, while a criminal defendant can't be compelled to hand over a passcode to police officers for the purpose of unlocking a cellular device, law enforcement officials can compel a defendant to give up a fingerprint.
The following should come as no surprise.
http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/222057-white-house-off...e-password
The White House has been trying to push people away from passwords since early 2011, when it launched the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace (NSTIC). The initiative funded public-private pilot programs working on secure password replacements.
(more info on NSTIC, see http://www.nist.gov/nstic/about-nstic.html)The White House has been trying to push people away from passwords since early 2011, when it launched the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace (NSTIC). The initiative funded public-private pilot programs working on secure password replacements.
