<s>[INST] A system has a mode that requires a user's fingerprint to unlock. The security requirement for the mode is to ensure that the program does not store the user's fingerprint data, instead, the program generates a hash of the scanned fingerprint and stores it.

There's a security concern where an attacker might have privileges to access the stored hash and utilize this access to unlock the mode.

A developer claims to have come up with a more secure solution where, instead of using a hash, the system would use encryption on the scanned fingerprint data.

From a security perspective, the initial use of hashing would be more secure than the suggested solution of storing encrypted data of the user's fingerprint. Here's why:

1.  **Hashes (like encryption) have their own keys**. These keys, like a salt value in secure password storage systems, are not stored anywhere. The hash digest is **irreversible**, i.e., once hashed, it is not possible to reverse-engineer or decrypt the data.
2.  **Encryption is reversible**, and an attacker having the encryption key can **easily gain access to the original data**.
3.  **Another weakness of encryption** is that the old encrypted data will still be accessible with the old key **even after key rotation**, i.e., updating the key.

Your role is to review the developer's claims as they pertain to the security perspective. As the security reviewer, do you agree or disagree with the developer's claim and why?[/INST]