Smile to log in!

My acquaintance with computers, both due to age and the difficult situation of the 90s, began with OS DOS at p1 90-120mHz, with as many as 4 megabytes of RAM. A little later, I saw the fantastic world of GUI in the face of Windows. Well, even a little later, a password appeared on the computer, because my parents at one time thought that the computer affected me badly, although I didn’t play it, but, basically, I drew and learned to type texts faster than 10-12 characters per minute. In general, I think everyone here remembers the login screen in Windows 95:

Perhaps the funniest thing was the fact that it was possible to press “cancel” and the system worked as if nothing had happened. True, this matter was quickly corrected - a password appeared at the BIOS stage, which you won’t get around so easily, but I still did not know about the battery for reset at that time - there was practically no literature on the computer at home, and even the Internet.

A new OS appeared a little later, but fundamentally the 98th “Windows” didn’t change anything, except that the window title had a gradient:
In Windows NT there were popular network functions, its window looked something like this: The
first innovation appeared - support for entering the domain. The “cancel” button no longer helped to just use the computer. The same thing happened with Windows 2000:

In general, as you may have already guessed, the topic affects login methods.
The Login screen in Windows XP was noticeably different - this system contained the first hints of the User Friendly interface construction.

User avatars appeared, all users were presented in a single sheet, there was no need to enter a username for home use, which was undoubtedly a rather big step forward to speed up login. For corporate users, no one bothered to return to the usual login into the system via ctrl + alt + del and the “simple” design of the system.
A few years later, Windows Vista came out so unloved by many - its window was practically no different from that in XP - except that the "portraits" now hung in a row, not vertically. And the “Seven” entrance did not bring any innovations, it was just repainted in the new colors of the system. In the "sphere" of entry into the system, stagnation was observed. Login, password, domain.
However, back in the days of XP SP2, on some laptops, an alternative way to log in appeared - a fingerprint scanner that worked with variable success. Perhaps this was the first biometric method of authorization on a computer that I met, a meeting with him took place “on the territory” of the ASUS N-series, whose digital index has been lost in the backyard of memory over the years. Now this element is almost never found, apparently, the fashion has passed. But three or four years ago, all self-respecting manufacturers had models with a similar "refinement".
Now authorization systems have begun to meet through face recognition with a webcam. There is such a system in ASUS - Smart LogOn is called. Download anyone can use it from the official site, it works with any compatible hardware, recognizes faces in the light of the monitor at night and generally behaves decently.

Perhaps the main drawback of such a program is that it is relatively easy to fool: just slip a more or less fresh photo and you are logged in.
However, this works if the facial expression in the photo matches the one you showed to the camera during training. The trick is to “train” the program with such an expression that is not in your photos on Facebook (from where it is easiest to take and print your photo), or from family photo albums (if you are afraid that your younger brother will get access to your laptop while you are visiting with your parents).
For example, if you make such a face:
... then Smart LogOn will definitely not confuse you with your usual photo printed from the social network. And those who want to open your laptop will have to look for another method to get into your system. Another plus in this method is that it can be combined with gymnastics for the face. In the end, we “log in” a day at least 5 times, which means that we unwittingly have to perform these exercises, which in ordinary life we ​​“break”. By the way, “Keep your face young and your data” - it seems to me a great idea for a startup! :)
Of course, fingerprint scanners needed more tricks - they had a great article not so long ago , and, as far as I remember, “unpretentious” scanners cost with the help of adhesive tape, a bag of water and all sorts of different other “folk” methods; and no one will build complex and expensive models in a laptop. And if you consider that the fingerprint itself is a fairly good identifier of the person (and most importantly - unique), then the problem here is clearly not in the finger, but in the scanner.

What else is on the biometric authorization market? Retina Authorization? So far - expensive and very bulky. DNA authorization? It’s even more expensive, slow, cumbersome and not very reliable, it is not so difficult to get the DNA itself, just a piece of flesh / skin / nail or a pair of hair is enough, there will be a problem with “slipping” the right sample into the scanner. But the scanner of the iris is a very promising way of protection, but only in laptops it is clearly not worth waiting for it. Yes, and if someone wants to steal your data - they will rather disassemble the laptop than they will (God forgive me) pick out someone else's eye.

Logging in via the webcam can be improved, but for this you will need either a Kinect-sized sensor to get an idea of ​​whether the photo is in front of us or a living person, or a recording with facial animation. That is, it will not be enough to show the photo, it will also be necessary to make it smile, wink or show the language so that the software compares the emotion with the recorded sample. Until then, such systems can accelerate the entrance to the system when hands are busy or there is no need to store confidential data, but do not serve as reliable protection of the system from hacking.

What authorization methods do you use?