[Feature request] Face Unlock on Google Pixel 9 Pro

DeletedUser26

pml yeah the extra effort is minimal and the security benefit is massive.

Rkpaxam

I've not missed face unlock, I have a beard, glasses and a round head, so it was always spotty. I instinctively now just put my thumb on the screen.

DeletedUser87

this is most likely not gonna happen. The face unlock in Stock utilizes advanced AI/ML models that were developed by Google and consumed quite a lot of money and need vast amounts of training data to work reliably. Recreating this doesn't seem reasonable for the GOS team. If you're (or anyone else is) asking for a less secure (face) unlocking method, I don't know what to tell you.

DeletedUser26

DeletedUser87 Every face unlock/fingerprint unlock uses ML, the main reason it’s not included to my understanding was they don’t have the proper hardware for secure face unlock in the newer pixels for whatever reason.

DeletedUser87

DeletedUser26 yes, maybe I should have been more precise. I meant 3D face unlock. To achieve that without the required hardware (IR blaster, IR camera or other depth sensors) is quite challenging with just a regular front camera with autofocus. The other scanners (that are also not certified to be secure like Samsung for example) don't offer that same in-depth training the Google models have. And I'm preeeetty certain the GOS team would never lower their standards beyond what even Google themselves offer; let alone other vendors. The Pixel 4 and 4 XL are the only Google phones to ever offer a physical (hardware based) face unlock due to the largely unsuccessful Soli sensor.

phone-company

Faceunlock is not secure. Not in Android, not in iPhone. If someone want you to unlock your phone, he just need strong arms to ask you for ;)

DeletedUser87

phone-company in that regard, every biometric method is not secure, especially fingerprint. At least you can hold down power + volume up/down for 3 seconds to disable FaceID on iOS. Would love a similar feature on GOS too.

DeletedUser26

phone-company Not really sure what you mean, Face ID has an option to not unlock unless you’re looking at it so it wouldn’t really be possible for someone to unlock it without you knowing very easily. Of course someone could always threaten you but then it’s the same as a password.

phone-company

DeletedUser87 thats the reason we should use 6digit codes for security... If someone asks you could give the dures pin ..
To explain, in many countries the unlock may be enforced by authorities....

alonely0

DeletedUser87 This feature does exist, it's the "Lockdown" button on the shutdown/reboot menu.

DeletedUser87

phone-company that's part of my threat model, I'll just happily comply. I tested duress two weeks ago btw. Works like a charm.

UN05863076

Created an account just to voice this opinion. Its really a bummer that GOS wont consider it. For me, and probably most people, a privacy screen protector would offer significantly better privacy and security mitigations in the real world, than the extremely small possibility that your phone is stolen and FaceID is cracked. But because fingerprint sensors suck with screen protectors (and more so with privacy screens), that's a big thing to miss out on. You'd think something like FaceID would be an option. People don't need to use it, but those who want to, could. Kind of the whole idea of Android, freedom to choose. I don't like being told that I can or can't use something because someone else decided that for me.

harp

UN05863076 As written before GOS is a strictly security faced OS. So the devs won't implement a highly insecure feature.

UN05863076 I don't like being told that I can or can't use something because someone else decided that for me.

Nobody want's you or even forces you to use GOS. Use whatever phone + OS combination you prefer. People decide to use GOS for their own reasons and because it is what it is.

RockHyrax

UN05863076

But because fingerprint sensors suck with screen protectors (and more so with privacy screens), that's a big thing to miss out on.

i have been using the the Spigen glastr ezfit privacy screen protector since I unboxed my Pixel 9 Pro (Nov 2024). Never once have I ever experienced any issues with reading my fingerprint with the new fingerprint sensor in the Pixel 9 Pro.

de0u

UN05863076 Its really a bummer that GOS wont consider it.

But it has been considered: https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/15613-what-features-will-be-missing-in-gos-android-15-version/29

UN05863076 I don't like being told that I can or can't use something because someone else decided that for me.

There is a world of difference between somebody telling you that you can't use something that you already have, and somebody not wanting to build something that you want and give it to you for free.

DeletedUser396

UN05863076
Do you bother to lock your front door with a key or is it just closed on Velcro, for your convenience?

starglider

de0u This comment should be stickied to the top of every open source project forum.

Ilt

Pixels 7-9 has dual-pixel cameras, so it could be used for depth sensing pretty well for face recognition and even has some sort of certification.
As I understand there is AOSP Face authentication HIDL and vendor closed source implementation of it..
It should be easy to add it to GOS make disabled by default and mark that option as "unsecure closed source". It would be very fair for those, who satisfied with this level of security for every day usage on non sensitive user account, for some more sensitive it is absolutely must to enable multiple users mode on device and add second user with strong auth.

Ilt

Ilt
More over, face recognition has advantage in counter "Shoulder surfing attack" because there is no secret input by user (that could be looked, recorded or even forgotten) and it is for sure more secure then fingerprint because of liveness detection by requirement of opened eyes.

userofgos

Ilt It should be easy to add it to GOS make disabled by default and mark that option as "unsecure closed source".

To say it would be "easy" to add any feature to GOS completely undermines the amount of work required to write secure code, test it, and maintain across every release. Also, GrapheneOS devs have been adamant on not adding any half-baked and/or low quality security features. So until the hardware/software meets their security requirements, I don't see it happening.

n3t_admin

Ilt Pixels 7-9 has dual-pixel cameras

what the fuck is that even supposed to mean?!

Ilt It should be easy

Then do it. You say it's easy - you're free to implement it in a pull request so that we all can benefit from your work.

Ilt More over, face recognition has advantage in counter "Shoulder surfing attack" because there is no secret input by user (that could be looked

no, it really isn't. Use fingerprint unlock to prevent shoulder surfing. Even better, use 2FA unlock which is the most secure method.

Ilt and it is for sure more secure then fingerprint

Quite the opposite actually and the only reason why it wasn't implemented.

Ilt liveness detection by requirement of opened eyes.

Fingerprint has the requirement of passing electric current. A cut off thumb won't do it.

Your "liveness detection" won't really do anything when we can't even verify code safety (being closed source and all). For all we know, there could be backdoors in the code.

Ilt

n3t_admin Ilt Pixels 7-9 has dual-pixel cameras

what the fuck is that even supposed to mean?!

There is twice more diods in sensor in horizontals placed side by side with little twist, so it able to use paralax effect to capture 3d in close distance, like if you have two eyes joined in one..

n3t_admin Ilt It should be easy

Then do it. You say it's easy - you're free to implement it in a pull request so that we all can benefit from your work.

Maybe, but it will take awhile for me and I will not eat for this.

n3t_admin Ilt More over, face recognition has advantage in counter "Shoulder surfing attack" because there is no secret input by user (that could be looked

no, it really isn't. Use fingerprint unlock to prevent shoulder surfing. Even better, use 2FA unlock which is the most secure method.

Security should be practical.

n3t_admin Ilt and it is for sure more secure then fingerprint

Quite the opposite actually and the only reason why it wasn't implemented.

Not true. As I have read, there is prepossession that it is unsecure and should be avoided in any case..

n3t_admin Ilt liveness detection by requirement of opened eyes.

Fingerprint has the requirement of passing electric current. A cut off thumb won't do it.

Just try, it will.

n3t_admin Your "liveness detection" won't really do anything when we can't even verify code safety (being closed source and all). For all we know, there could be backdoors in the code.

Implementation could and should be verified statistically even if you have source code.. if it sandboxed will be very complicated to embed a backdoor in blob.

Besides you already has many blobs and 🫢 silicone chip in device that you don't know nothing about.

LeslieFH

n3t_admin Fingerprint has the requirement of passing electric current. A cut off thumb won't do it.

No, it doesn't. The fingerprint reader in Pixel phones is either optical or ultrasound, behind non-conductive glass, it has no way to check for electricity.

I mean, you're right that fingerprint is somewhat safer than face unlock when it comes to biometrics, but both aren't very secure.