[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Discuss] Fidelity voice-recognition security?
- Subject: [Discuss] Fidelity voice-recognition security?
- From: kentborg at borg.org (Kent Borg)
- Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 12:44:10 -0500
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On 11/22/2017 12:17 PM, Richard Pieri wrote: > On 11/21/2017 11:27 AM, Daniel Barrett wrote: >> I declined the feature. Fingerprinting a voice uniquely over a >> low-quality telephone line? I can't imagine that's more secure than a >> non-obvious password. What does the security crowd here think? > Passwords suck. Voices are unique. In principle, voice identification > can be a good authentication system. In practice, it depends on how many > retries and how much deviation from a given user's baseline the system > permits. In practice there plenty of things to go wrong. Enormous complexity is added to do voice authentication. Complexity is the enemy of both reliability and security. Sure, the trade-off can be worth it, but be skeptical, the burden of proof needs to be on the proposed complex system that wants to be layered on top. But we don't do that, we just shovel in enormous stuff after enormous stuff we don't understand. That's how RAM and storage capacity has added so many orders of magnitude for relatively little benefit, the extra is cruft we don't understand, we just keep shoveling it in. Indeed, passwords suck*. But just because they suck doesn't mean any given alternative is necessarily better. -kb * Passwords are kinda like democracy: Many forms of Government have been tried and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.? - Winston Churchill Circa 2017 it's /REALLY/ easy to argue that democracy sucks. Doesn't mean any given alternative is necessarily better.