Xref: utzoo comp.windows.misc:1011 comp.sys.next:1272 comp.sys.mac:25198 comp.cog-eng:895
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!nrl-cmf!ukma!rutgers!bellcore!texbell!killer!radar!root
From: root@radar.UUCP (root)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.misc,comp.sys.next,comp.sys.mac,comp.cog-eng
Subject: Re: One Step...
Message-ID: <151@radar.UUCP>
Date: 16 Jan 89 13:55:41 GMT
References: <263@gloom.UUCP> <4498@xenna.Encore.COM> <69@poppy.warwick.ac.uk>
Reply-To: donn@radar.UUCP ()
Organization: CDS Consulting/Macinterested, Nashville, TN
Lines: 13

In article <69@poppy.warwick.ac.uk> maujt@warwick.ac.uk (Richard J Cox) writes:
>In article <4498@xenna.Encore.COM> bzs@Encore.COM (Barry Shein) writes:
>>Fun note but why do a password challenge when a retinal scan would
>>have been more secure? (please, no disgusting remarks about how to fool
>>a retinal scanner.)
>
>How about using some kind of DNA finger printing? - take a small sample
>of blood (ouch!) and check on this. This would be almost impossible to fool.

Be serious. Besides the invasiveness of the procedure, it's just too slow and
labor intensive using present technology.

Donn S. Fishbein, MD