Feeds

Laptop facial recognition defeated by Photoshop

Taking a long hard stare at biometric security

Beginner's guide to SSL certificates

White hat security researchers have demoed how to bypass the facial recognition systems on several laptops.

The facial recognition software on Lenovo, Asus and Toshiba laptops (known as Veriface III, SmartLogon 1.0.0005 and Face Recognition 2.0.2.32, respectively) was compromised by security researchers including Duc Nguyen, senior researcher at Vietnamese security firm Bkis.

Details of the hack are were outlined by a presentation entitled Your face is NOT your Password during the Blackhat security conference in Washington earlier this week.

The laptops use webcams in conjunction with facial biometric software, as an alternative to more well-established login techniques. The researchers claim that the log-in approach can be defeated using nothing more sophisticated than a photograph of a PC's registered user, or even Photoshopped images.

Nguyen and his team created a large number of images to run what they described a "fake face bruteforce" attack to fool the systems, which in fairness are still in their infancy, into allowing a log-on. The approach can be compared to trying out a huge number of possible text passwords until the right combination is stumbled upon as part of a conventional brute-force dictionary attack.

Laptop makers ought to review the whole approach of facial recognition as a login technique, the researchers argue.

"Lenovo, Asus, and Toshiba are known as the first three big computer manufacturers to put that technology into practical use and to bring about greater convenience for their customers," Nguyen explains. "The one question to ask is whether such technology is really safe and secure for its users to enjoy."

"My research, which is concluded in this paper, will prove that the mechanisms used by those three vendors haven’t met the security requirements needed by an authentication system and that they cannot wholly protected their users from being tampered," he adds. ®

Protecting users from Firesheep and other Sidejacking attacks with SSL

More from The Register

next story
Spies would need SUPER POWERS to tap undersea cables
Why mess with armoured 10kV cables when land-based, and legal, snoop tools are easier?
Early result from Scots indyref vote? NAW, Jimmy - it's a SCAM
Anyone claiming to know before tomorrow is telling porkies
Jihadi terrorists DIDN'T encrypt their comms 'cos of Snowden leaks
Intel bods' analysis concludes 'no significant change' after whistle was blown
TOR users become FBI's No.1 hacking target after legal power grab
Be afeared, me hearties, these scoundrels be spying our signals
Hackers pop Brazil newspaper to root home routers
Step One: try default passwords. Step Two: Repeat Step One until success
China hacked US Army transport orgs TWENTY TIMES in ONE YEAR
FBI et al knew of nine hacks - but didn't tell TRANSCOM
Microsoft to patch ASP.NET mess even if you don't
We know what's good for you, because we made the mess says Redmond
NORKS ban Wi-Fi and satellite internet at embassies
Crackdown on tardy diplomatic sysadmins providing accidental unfiltered internet access
prev story

Whitepapers

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk
A single remote control platform for user support is be key to providing an efficient helpdesk. Retain full control over the way in which screen and keystroke data is transmitted.
WIN a very cool portable ZX Spectrum
Win a one-off portable Spectrum built by legendary hardware hacker Ben Heck
Saudi Petroleum chooses Tegile storage solution
A storage solution that addresses company growth and performance for business-critical applications of caseware archive and search along with other key operational systems.
Protecting users from Firesheep and other Sidejacking attacks with SSL
Discussing the vulnerabilities inherent in Wi-Fi networks, and how using TLS/SSL for your entire site will assure security.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.