Mementos as Document Retrieval Keys

Dekaner writes "The BBC is running a story that BT has demonstrated a scanner that can be used to retrieve digital documents by associating them with a physical object. When the digital files are stored on the server, they are associated with a scanned image of the object, for example a seashell. Later, when the user wants to retrieve the files, the memento is again placed on the scanner. The resulting image is used as the retrieval key."

Re:The bane of the photocopier...

[grishnav]

Your crappy joke not withstanding, it makes you wonder just how well it will be able to identify individual momento's. Will it be able to distinguish one person's ass from another? Or more practically, palm? Fingerprint?

My question is why?

[MyNameIsFred]

To me this sounds like many of the other poorly concieved ideas for indexing files. Much like meta-data fields that require me to fill out extra fields that can be searched later. The vast majority of people don't fill the fields in. And where required, they typically use bogus data.

This situation seems much the same. Most of the files I save on a computer are NOT associated with some object I have lying around the house. For example, everytime I write a letter to Mom, I'm suppose to scan her picture? Why not just save it in a folder called, "Letters to Mom." Its easier, quicker, and I don't have to find Mom's picture. Similarly at work, most of my files are associated with some email telling me to do work on some project. Do I scan the email? Seems kind of pointless.

In my view, like metadata, this suggestion adds steps that the vast majority of users won't do.

Re:The bane of the photocopier...

[Winterblink]

Not a big surprise that police agencies use scanners now for taking fingerprints direct into their computer systems. It'd be interesting to see how this system works out, especially how it compares to conventional cryptographic key generation methods.

Johnny Mneumonic

[rice_burners_suck]

This is just like Johnny Mneumonic. Every day, with the bullshit being pulled by the RIAA, MPAA, Microsoft and other predatory multinational multibillion dollar organizations seeking nothing more than eternal perpetually increasing profits, the world gets closer to the reality portrayed in that movie. That was the subject of Johnny Mneumonic; in that case, it was a pharmaceuticals company that let people stay sick even though they had a cure because it meant more profits for them.

But that's NOT why I associate this with Johnny Mneumonic. I associate it because in the beginning of the movie, they're going to store 80 gigs of information (about as much as I have in /usr/home/) in Just Johnny's head. They use three random images from the television to associate with and encrypt the information. These images are then faxed to the recipient. Obviously the bits aren't being used because they would change in faxing. A more associative method is used, kind of like a human memory. I think that with time, more technologies like this will be used as our computational needs advance; That is, unless these multibillion dollar corporations have their way and our computers become merely vessels for receiving garbage information (valuable intellectual property) like the stupid movies and music being made nowadays, while "real" computers will be labeled as "professional equipment" and will cost five hundred times as much as they should so that only the corporations can afford them to keep us under control.

In the world of the future, it will be corporations, not governments, that will oppress the people. The governments will only serve as a tool to those corporations. Capitalism is fine; I just think that one change needs to be made: The individuals should have a much louder "voice" in government issues than corporations. In fact, the "voice" of any party should be inversely proportional to its size and power. The RIAA should not have enough voice to mail a letter to a senator, let alone do the evils that they are doing.

old idea

[g4dget]

Using images of physical tokens to access documents is a really old idea. Of course, that won't stop BT from filing a patent.

Demolition Man...

[da3dAlus]

"I went to retrieve the files, but in their place were these damn 3 seashells..."

"Hahahah...he doesn't know what the 3 seashells are for!"

Just what is a Type 2 security error again?

[LostCluster]

This is a sure fire recipe for data loss of critical data. All the server backups you can make would become worthless if the seashell/encryption key falls into the hands of a three year old with crayon or is lost/ruined in any other way.

It's a nice novelty for encrypting your digital little black book, but it's not going to be useful at all for business databases.

I'd use...

[1nv4d3r]

a piece of paper with the filename written on it.

Because, really, a box full of small objects is harder to associate with unrelated files than the filename is.

If you can say to yourself, "lessee, did I use the blue pill or the red pill for 2003 Actuals?", you would get a lot further naming the file "2003 Actuals" and looking for that. Wouldn't you?

Bleh,

[autopr0n]

This might be somewhat cool if you could use a simple digital camera, and you didn't need to worry about angle (this would require an all-angles storage, of course)

Either way, it seems pretty useless for most people. As long as we can tell what an object is we could simply type it's name in and search that way. It could be useful for large museums and scientists, thought.

Re:Johnny Mneumonic

[tarzan353]

In the world of the future, it will be corporations, not governments, that will oppress the people. The governments will only serve as a tool to those corporations.

In the future?

Humane technology

[asreal]

This is one of those inventions that makes technology easier a bit more fun and a lot more personal. It doesn't make sense for every day use - you wouldn't want to use it to store office documents or your taxes - but imagine the sentimental possibilities. Associating a ring that belonged to your mother with pictures of her and a slideshow, or the seashell in question with video and music from your romantic beach vacation.

So before you go off saying how complicated and pointless a system like this would be, remember that it won't just be geeks using it. But of course, it could make a very interesting password system in the right hands...

Re:The bane of the photocopier...

[grishnav]

"[W]hat is the point?"

Just trying to spark some thought into interesting alternate usses of the technology.

How long before somebody hacks it to use a camera as the input source? You could do all sorts of interesting things with a camera able to recognise objects. You could, say, periodically rotate a camera around your room to capture the various objects in it, and make a profile for insurance records if you house is ever broken into.

Now that scanners are available rather cheaply, you could easily hack a small scanner to fit in a mountable, waterproof box, and create a nifty keyless entry system for your house, using fingerprint, handprint, faceprint, armprint, footprint, or virtually anything else you can imagine. (You would, of course, keep a real key for backup purposes.)

"Sounds like fancy sci-fi wrapping from a journalist[...]"

I think was intended to be an insult, but - being as I'm not a journalist - I'll take the comparison as a compliment.

"[...]who has missed the opportunity to think and perhaps present something more insightful."

If my intent is to spark thought, need I do either?

a great idea with a not so great implemtation

[l0ungeb0y]

Using a tangible reference that can't easily be guessed/produced by a non-authorized party is a great idea in data security.

However, it seems flawed since you have to:
a) determine a method to reference the objects to their locked data if you use multiple objects as associations.

b) determine a method to securely store that object

c) Raise the question of the uniqueness of that object.

So for this to work, you'd have to create a secured storage location and a means to remember each items association.
And then each time you created a new object of association, you'd have to ask "Is this object unique or could someone easiliy go and obtain a comparable object to use in it's place?"

So while it's a novel idea and most worthy of continued R&D, it is not yet a practical solution as it only adds a layer of security that raises it's own potential security risks.

I could see an offshoot of this solution using imaging software to create complex patterns at the time of encryption that would be apparant noise to the human eye, but be read easily by a machine. These images could be small and stored on a memory stick. This method would be difficult to reproduce as the image itself would be based off the encrypted bits + the encryption key and stored on an external device. But unless they developed a biometric access mechanism(thumbprint scanning etc) on the access point or memory stick itself, there would still be the problems in secure storage/handling of the key.

But regardless, it is good to see new approaches to an age old problem.

I think it's a good idea

[TwinBeam]

Those of you being snide need to think again.

To you it sounds pointless and silly and wastefully kludgy. The same sort of snide remarks were made about graphical displays and color monitors and mice. Such attitudes overlooked that people LIKED working with computers that had those features.

The proposal is not a data retrieval system - it's a memory retrieval system. And it isn't oriented to bringing up that memo you wrote last week - it's to bring back your images of your wedding or vacation of 20 years ago. And just a data point - my wife think's it's a cool idea. So maybe this is one of those things that women will understand and want more than men. (You know - women - those odd creatures that press flowers, save invitations from weddings, make shadow boxes, save children's teeth, etc? A digital memory box may very well be a highly desirable consumer product.)

Re:Johnny Mneumonic: True in the Movie, not the st

[Anonymous Coward]

that bloody communism, always killing people... now fascism, that never killed anyone! we should embrace our new fascist masters, and quickly, before communism sees a revival!

Could be used in cataloging systems.

[Wateshay]

It seems to me like this would be most useful for cataloging. A museum, for instance, could take a scan of each item in their collection, and then use that as one means of bringing up all of their data on that item. Or a stamp collector could use it to store information on each stamp in his collection. I think the stated uses in the article are kind of silly, but I can definitely see this having some value.

Sounds stupid...

[dfj225]

So now instead of looking through the my documents/history section on my computer for that paper on George Washington, I have to dig through all my old stuff to find his bust? Sounds like much more work with this "new" system. I think that if you organize your files in a logical manner, then it is very difficult to lose them. Personally, I would much rather have a faster/better search tool for Windows than having to dig up a physical object to look up my files.

Why?

[Aguamala]

What kind of practical uses can this have? I mean a computer does the same thing...it associates 1's and 0's to their respected files so why is this considered a step forward??? So now to open a document or a file we have to scan in an image...isn't that counter productive?

Re:Johnny Mneumonic: True in the Movie, not the st

[Cruciform]

Communism hasn't killed anyone. Corrupt communist politicians have.

Genocide does not have political allies.