On Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:03:27 pm m.roth@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Lamar Owen wrote:
> > Fingerprints are too easily faked. Mythbusters did it in a 'Crime and
> > Mythdemeanors' episode a few years ago.
> I can beat that: I read, a month or so ago, how a bunch of elementary
> school kids discovered that wet Gummi Bears would hold a fingerprint,
> *and* (they didn't understand this) have more or less the same electrical
> conductivity....
Gummi bears are a pretty good simulcrum for ballistics gel, which is what MB used.
MB did it differently, though, in that they lifted the fingerprint from an object the subject touched, that was not gel. IIRC, it was a CD case. It's a good episode; see https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/MythBusters_%282006_season%29#Fingerprint_Lock for a synopsis of that portion. (If you're wondering why the link is to an https site.... well, I'm running HTTPSAnywhere..... :-) )
Two-factor security should be standard, really. Fingerprint plus ID card, or fingerprint plus keycode, etc. One factor being something you uniquely have, and the other being either something you have or something you know.
Speaking of, with PAM being standard in CentOS, has anyone here done physical security (like datacenter doors and such) where the controller is open source and usable on CentOS? I'd be interested in kitting such a setup for our datacenters here.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
