So Google has gone a different, albeit cool, way of unlocking your phone. Rather than the standard 4-digit pin that most systems have, Google has designed a type of symbol recognition system that will let you draw on screen by playing connect the dots.
Now, if you only use 4 dots, the system is less secure than using a pin, but past 4 dots, it has the potential (depending on a few variables that my friends and I argued about [see below for transcript]) to be much more secure. Of course, that is due the the increased amount of digits, or in this case gestures, rather than the system itself being more secure.
Found via: TechCrunch
IRC Transcript
16:09:49 <Thakorr>: tim
16:09:50 <Thakorr>: http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/10/12/androids-login-is-cool-but-is-it-secure/
16:10:05 <Thakorr>: i know you dont care but its sorta lul
16:10:06 <Thakorr>: so read
16:12:13 <Skyy>: that’s interesting
16:12:32 <tim|wrk>: i think it’s cool
16:12:57 <tim|wrk>: i also think you’re dumb if you think some four digit code is any more secure than that
16:16:04 <Skyy>: well
16:17:04 <Skyy>: ur first option is 1/9, but then, depending on where you start, your second option could drop down to as low as 1/2
16:17:26 <Skyy>: if you were using digits, each digit would be 1/10
16:17:41 <Skyy>: so there is a higher, inhert security in using digits
16:18:28 <tim|wrk>: digits can be beat just as easy as that
16:19:30 <Skyy>: sure, brute force is going to get through it
16:19:47 <Skyy>: but i’m just saying… mathematically, using digits is actually better
16:20:18 <Skyy>: unless you can overlap with the Android log in
16:20:21 <tim|wrk>: assuming you can touch more than four dots for a complete pattern, mathematics disagree
16:21:31 <tim|wrk>: regardless, whoever wrote than article is an idiot
16:21:38 <tim|wrk>: there is no such thing as security for phones, period.
16:21:50 <Skyy>: you’d have to be able to overlap (pic the same spot again) AND not have to touch an adjacent dot
16:21:56 <tim|wrk>: from the transfer of data to your phone calls to the dinky lock protection
16:22:03 <Skyy>: even then… there are only 9 dots, and 10 digits
16:22:07 <Skyy>: digits wins
16:22:11 <tim|wrk>: wrong
16:22:39 <Skyy>: ur right
16:22:45 <Skyy>: there are really only 8 dots
16:23:05 <Skyy>: even with overlap, i doubt you can touch the same dot ur on 2 times in a row
16:23:28 <tim|wrk>: with each consecutive pattern movement, the complexity grows exponentially
16:23:40 <tim|wrk>: with four digits you’re limited to the number of possibilities
16:24:07 <tim|wrk>: let’s pretend android can take anywhere from 2-10 movements for success
16:24:36 <tim|wrk>: right off the bat, that’s more complex, due to the range of possible sizes
16:24:45 <Skyy>: false
16:25:02 <Skyy>: let’s say you have 2 movements… just to start
16:25:47 <Skyy>: ur fist move is worth 9, and ur second move is worth, at most, 8
16:25:51 <Skyy>: 9*8
16:26:03 <Skyy>: if u use digits, it’s 10*10
16:26:13 <tim|wrk>: that’s not what i’m referencing
16:26:18 <Skyy>: what?
16:26:22 <tim|wrk>: you’re trying to hack into someone’s phone
16:26:28 <tim|wrk>: you don’t know if it’s 2 movements, or 10
16:26:35 <tim|wrk>: with the phone you know it’s 4, period.
16:26:45 <tim|wrk>: digits*
16:27:02 <Skyy>: oh i c…
16:27:15 <Skyy>: but ur asumming all phones only allow a 4 digit pin
16:27:31 <Skyy>: assuming**
16:28:06 <tim|wrk>: just referencing the article
16:28:10 <tim|wrk>: which mentions only 4 digits
16:28:18 <tim|wrk>: also it mentions 4 is minimum movement for the android
16:28:21 <tim|wrk>: so knock 2 to 4
16:30:01 <Skyy>: even so… it could take upto 6 or 7 movements (i’m not doing the math) to provide a more secure lock than using 4 digits
16:30:15 <tim|wrk>: naaah that math is way off
16:30:36 <tim|wrk>: !g 10*10*10*10
16:30:38 <jill>: Sorry, no search results were found.
16:30:49 <tim|wrk>: 10000 right
16:30:55 <Skyy>: right
16:31:14 <tim|wrk>: so, let’s say 5 movements
16:31:20 <tim|wrk>: 9*8*8*8*8
16:31:32 <tim|wrk>: 36864
16:31:49 <tim|wrk>: 294912 for 6
16:31:57 <tim|wrk>: 2359296 for 7
16:32:09 <Skyy>: ahh… but every subsequent move doesn’t have 8 possibilities
16:32:19 <Skyy>: it looks like it has to be adjacent
16:32:32 <tim|wrk>: does it?
16:32:37 <Skyy>: so 8 could drop down to 4
16:33:07 <tim|wrk>: zainy – October 12th, 2008 at 11:42 pm PDT No, they don’t have to be adjacent. Nobody said you have to draw straight lines from one point to another.
16:33:25 <Skyy>: link it
16:33:51 <tim|wrk>: it’s on that page
16:33:56 <tim|wrk>: just ctrl + F adjacent
16:36:44 <Skyy>: ok fine… i’ll concede the fact that they didn’t say they had to be adjacent, but my guess is that, given screen size, resolution, and touch screen precision, they are keeping the lines as short and direct as possible
16:37:17 <Skyy>: also, in the vid, every line the guy drew was impossibly straight, convincing me further that he was just tracing paths
Leave a Comment 
Interesting, but I think it would be a bit harder to memorize, and definitely much harder to tell someone else what it is, whether in writing or verbally.
I definitely thinks it’s a cool idea, and agree with you that it would be harder to communicate, but as far as memorizing… i don’t know. shapes can be fairly simple to memorize. i mean, that’s what written language is based on… the memorization of shapes.
i think once they allow for free form shapes as passwords, then that would be the ultimate password system.