Feeds

Carjackers swipe biometric Merc, plus owner's finger

Sometimes you might not want such great security...

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

A Malaysian businessman has lost a finger to car thieves impatient to get around his Mercedes' fingerprint security system. Accountant K Kumaran, the BBC reports, had at first been forced to start the S-class Merc, but when the carjackers wanted to start it again without having him along, they chopped off the end of his index finger with a machete.

Although security systems of this sort are typically fitted to high end cars (because of import duties, Kumaran's car is reported to have been worth $75,000 "second-hand" - under the circumstances, we think we'd have said 'at resale'), they're not in essence particularly high tech or high security. As is the case with most auto security systems, they're mainly a speed bump intended to make it sufficiently hard for the would-be thief to encourage them to look elsewhere for victims. The fingerprint readers themselves will, like similar devices aimed at the computer or electronic device markets, have a fairly broad tolerance, on the basis that products that stop people using their own cars, computers or whatever because their fingers are a bit sweaty won't turn out to be very popular.

They slow thieves up a tad, many people will find them more convenient than passwords or pin numbers, and as they're apparently 'cutting edge' and biometric technology is allegedly 'foolproof', they allow their owners to swank around in a false aura of high tech. Get the secured object on its own for a little while and you can usually chop the security off fairly easily, but as the evidence now shows the more determined and impatient class of thief might just chop off your finger as a temporary measure.

Clearly we need to think carefully about how we see security here. If you're held at knife point at the cash machine and your assailant demands your pin number, then you will understand there may be consequences to refusing. Whether or not you do will depend on numerous of factors, but it is likely that most people will under certain conditions decide it's sensible to give in. You could see this as meaning that a pin number is inadequate as a security device, and that something else, backed, say, by biometrics, would be better. Which is pretty much what many of our leaders, including our own, which has specifically commended the efficacy of ID card-backed security for financial transactions, have been recommending.

But as the S-class Merc with security too irritating for the good of its owners health has shown, it's a lot more complicated than that. You don't want situations where a severed finger (or, would be kid-chippers should note) or arm can be used in unsupervised situations in their owner's absence. You could consider more sophisticated systems which used more complex biometrics and performed some form of check to make sure the owner was still attached and breathing, but even then you shouldn't view this as 100 per cent perfect.

If, for example, it's a case of ruthless gangsters trying to steal an extremely valuable motor car, then they'll quite probably take you along for a ride down to the bent auto shop they use, then kill you. Or if the security is so frustratingly good that the drug-crazed psycho can't even get a cashpoint withdrawal out of the deal, they might just stab you.

The UK's Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) incidentally extolled the virtues of biometric security in its evidence for the Parliamentary Transport Committee's Cars of the Future enquiry, and while the Home Office hasn't put forward biometric credit card validation as an immediate gain for the ID card scheme, this is certainly on its roadmaps.

But they should consider the implications before they get into that kind of territory, and understand that in most cases there will come a point where you actually want the owner to be able to disable the security quickly and easily. At minimum, biometrically-locked motor vehicles should surely kick up a 'Disable fingerprint security? Y/N') dialogue whenever you stick your finger into them. ®

Related Stories:

Civil liberty group pans EU biometrics plans
HP iPaq hx2750 PocketPC
Japanese banks deploy biometric palm scanners

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

More from The Register

next story
Facebook pays INFINITELY MORE UK corp tax than in 2012
Thanks for the £3k, Zuck. Doh! you're IN CREDIT. Guess not
Facebook, Apple: LADIES! Why not FREEZE your EGGS? It's on the company!
No biological clockwatching when you work in Silicon Valley
Yes, yes, Steve Jobs. Look what I'VE done for you lately – Tim Cook
New iPhone biz baron points to Apple's (his) greatest successes
Happiness economics is bollocks. Oh, UK.gov just adopted it? Er ...
Opportunity doesn't knock; it costs us instead
Ex-US Navy fighter pilot MIT prof: Drones beat humans - I should know
'Missy' Cummings on UAVs, smartcars and dying from boredom
Sysadmin with EBOLA? Gartner's issued advice to debug your biz
Start hoarding cleaning supplies, analyst firm says, and assume your team will scatter
Edward who? GCHQ boss dodges Snowden topic during last speech
UK spies would rather 'walk' than do 'mass surveillance'
prev story

Whitepapers

Cloud and hybrid-cloud data protection for VMware
Learn how quick and easy it is to configure backups and perform restores for VMware environments.
A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.