http://cubist.cs.washington.edu/Security/2008/01/13/security-review-biometric-passports/ Mon, 06 Oct 2008 13:53:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 http://cubist.cs.washington.edu/Security/2008/01/13/security-review-biometric-passports/#comment-323 dubai Wed, 06 Feb 2008 21:37:29 +0000 http://cubist.cs.washington.edu/Security/2008/01/13/security-review-biometric-passports/#comment-323 i agree, equipment that can read these passports could fall into the wrong hands, which could expose us to a whole range of new threats. i agree, equipment that can read these passports could fall into the wrong hands, which could expose us to a whole range of new threats.

]]> http://cubist.cs.washington.edu/Security/2008/01/13/security-review-biometric-passports/#comment-32 zaxim Thu, 17 Jan 2008 03:17:08 +0000 http://cubist.cs.washington.edu/Security/2008/01/13/security-review-biometric-passports/#comment-32 The 30 feet number was touted by the ACLU, so they might be over exaggerating, to emphasize the privacy threat. But some other numbers are 5-15 feet. Which is still excessive in my opinion. The 30 feet number was touted by the ACLU, so they might be over exaggerating, to emphasize the privacy threat. But some other numbers are 5-15 feet. Which is still excessive in my opinion.

]]> http://cubist.cs.washington.edu/Security/2008/01/13/security-review-biometric-passports/#comment-23 bcbell Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:37:40 +0000 http://cubist.cs.washington.edu/Security/2008/01/13/security-review-biometric-passports/#comment-23 The fact that these can be read at 30 feet seems to be a puzzling design decision. I can't think of any security checkpoint where this kind of range would be used: at some point somebody has to get a good look at the passport holder's face to compare it against a photo (physical or digital) and this probably isn't going to be done at anything more than 10 feet (this is conservative estimate in my opinion). Overall it seems like an unnecessary risk. The fact that these can be read at 30 feet seems to be a puzzling design decision. I can’t think of any security checkpoint where this kind of range would be used: at some point somebody has to get a good look at the passport holder’s face to compare it against a photo (physical or digital) and this probably isn’t going to be done at anything more than 10 feet (this is conservative estimate in my opinion). Overall it seems like an unnecessary risk.

]]>