[BikerNYC]

No freakin' way.

[RockinRight]

Way too "1984ish" to me.

[texaschick]

A sign of the times.......the end times.

[Blueflag]

Oh please - lighten up. God gave you your fingerprints, not the government. This is a [nearly] foolproof way to authenticate. It's a lot safer than the PIN on your ATM card.

[Republican Red]

I know I shouldn't like this idea but, my purse with id, credit cards and checkbook were stolen a few weeks ago. I found out hours later only because American Express called to tell me someone was using my card at a Texaco to buy beer.

In the hours that the stolen stuff went undetected the thieves ran up huge bills all around town. Although they also had my driver's license, it is doubtful that they look like a red-headed, 40 something, suburban mom. When the Texaco asked for id for the beer they ran. No other store clerks questioned the thieves.

If stores are not going to go through due diligence in checking validity of credit cards this finger print system sounds okay to me. Maybe in a few weeks after the headaches of closing credit cards, changing bank accounts, stopping automated debits, getting new id etc. I'll change my opinion.

I do know that I am for the death penalty for purse thieves.

[discostu]

I don't think popular culture still associates fingerprinting with criminals. Far too many places use it far too regularly, these days it's associated with security. A system like this is infinitely more secure than your PIN or signature varification. Credit card fraud is still a major problem in this country, a problem that costs retail businesses and credit card companies a lot of money, and those costs get passed on to the consumer. People gotta stop freaking out about every little bump in technology.

[Recovering_Democrat]

Fine with me. Who is gonna steal my finger to pay? Actually, I want to keep my American Express Membership Rewards Card...I like earning free airline flights. :)

[Rhetorical pi2]

Hmmm.....well it DOES have this Big Brother kind of feel to it.However, "Identity Theft" would be a bit more difficult.

I don't suppose it would bother me much. I'm always showing my driver's license and such anyway.

Will chopping somone's finger off to use for ID become the next fad in crime? (Kidding!!)

[Cultural Jihad]

The system is proving to be quite popular with Thriftway's patrons, who are increasingly using and even demanding the new payment approach -- likely because it is fast and convenient . . .

File it under the meeting of freewill and innovation, both themes of which get the doubters, detractors, and chicken-littles to crawl out of the woodwork.

[maine-iac7]

lemmings over the cliff

yeah, I want everyone to have access to my fingerprints - not

not to mention - what a nice record of where you go when

[Hildy]

I've been doing it at my tanning salon for over a year. It makes sense there because you pay a monthly fee for unlimited services and they want to make sure that you're the only one using your membership. So you have to put your finger on an electrical device and they see if it's a match on the computer. It's kinda cool.

[G32]

Worked in Back to the Future 2..

[navygal]

Does it matter which finger?

[MikefromOhio]

well I will give this topic this...

it DID bring out the black helicopter crowd.

PEOPLE THEY WILL STILL ACCEPT CASH!!! sheesh

[zeugma]

I'd like to point out to supporters of this that this will not protect you against identity theft. If anything, it will make identity theft much easier and harder to prove for the victim.

These fingerprint scanners have already been subverted and thus proven to be not nearly the foolproof biometric identifier they are heralded as.

Let us fast forward a few years from now. Fingerprint scanners are just about everywhere and many, if not most people use them because they are just so darned convienient. Now, let's say that Alice and Bob go to a resturaunt. They order and consume a meal, then Bob pays for it using that wonderfully convienient fingerprint system. Alice and Bob leave the resturaunt. While bussing their table, Charlie, their waiter, sets the glass that Bob was using aside.

Later on, he lifts the prints from the glass and takes them home. Once home he uses a kit that has become fairly common amonst criminals like himself to create a little latex copy of Bob's fingerprint that he can wear.

Charlie goes on a spending spree. No alarms go off at the credit card company because all the purchases were digitally "signed" with Bob's "unique" fingerprint. Once the fraud is discovered by Bob he's going to have a heck of a time proving that he didn't make the purchases because of the inherrant trust the system gets by virtue of the fact that "everyone knows fingerprints are unique".

Fingerprint scanners are not a cure-all for the problem of identity theft. As a matter of fact, until people start understanding the weaknesses of such systems, they may be even more dangerous than credit cards because of (incorrect) assumptions people will make of their security.

[NotJustAnotherPrettyFace]

PAYMENT BY FINGERPRINT - A GOOD THING?

H*LL NO!

[snowsislander]

The Cryptome HTML version of Impact of Artificial "Gummy" Fingers on Fingerprint Systems from researchers at Yokohama National University.

The abstract: Potential threats caused by something like real fingers, which are called fake or artificial fingers, should be crucial for authentication based on fingerprint systems. Security evaluation against attacks using such artificial fingers has been rarely disclosed. Only in patent literature, measures, such as "live and well" detection, against fake fingers have been proposed. However, the providers of fingerprint systems usually do not mention whether or not these measures are actually implmented in emerging fingerprint systems for PCs or smart cards or portable terminals, which are expected to enhance the grade of personal authentication necessary for digital transactions. As researchers who are pursuing secure systems, we would like to discuss attacks using artificial fingers and conduct experimental research to clarify the reality. This paper reports that gummy fingers, namely artificial fingers that are easily made of cheap and readily available gelatin, were accepted by extremely high rates by particular fingerprint devices with optical or capacitive sensors. We have used the molds, which we made by pressing our live fingers against them or by processing fingerprint images from prints on glass surfaces, etc. We describe how to make the molds, and then show that the gummy fingers, which are made with these molds, can fool the fingerprint devices.

[isthisnickcool]

I know some nerds that built one of the first systems that does this kind of stuff.

All these systems are "print-to-PIN" systems. Which means you have to have the print and also the PIN. So, you might cut off someones finger or make a mold or whatever else you can conjure and find out that by gosh you can't steal a bag of Cheetos and a six pack of Bud because you don't have the PIN. No PIN, no "Learning about Cuba, and having some food" as Jeff Spicoli once said.

These systems don't actually hold the print image, they convert the image to data point numbers. Once you press on the device then those numbers are interchanged then you have to enter the PIN.

I doubt anyone will be chopping off uncle Frank's finger then torturing him for his PIN before heading to the grocery. Besides, even the $5.00 an hour checkout girl Sally Joe might notice the blood dripping onto the scanner. (SALLY: Oh my gosh! That's it so gross! I'm not cleaning this!)

So, I suggest that if grandma kicks the bucket and you want to use all her cash at the grocery store make sure you get the PIN from her first then make a gelatin finger (make sure it's the correct finger) from her dead hand (the correct hand too) before you stuff her in the freezer out in the garage.

Personally, I'd prefer that they not use fingerprints and change all the technology over to tongue prints. 1) Just to see who would use it and 2) Just to make watching women checking out at the grocery store more interesting.