Vulnerabilities / Threats
9/16/2009
06:12 PM
Connect Directly
LinkedIn
Twitter
Google+
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Consumers Accept Device Fingerprinting, Study Finds

To fight online fraud, consumers are warming to the idea of technology that identifies the device they're using.

Computer users are willing to accept device profiling if it leads to improved security and less sharing of personal information, according to a study conducted by the Ponemon Institute, an independent privacy research organization.

The study, Online Consumers' Reaction to Device Fingerprinting, was sponsored by ThreatMetrix, a security company that sells device profiling software.

Device profiling involves the analysis of information about an Internet user's hardware, software, and network traffic to identify typical usage patterns and to raise a red flag, if, for instance, the user is suddenly accessing a Web site with a different operating system or from a different country.

ThreatMetrix marketing VP Tom Grubb claims the company uses only public data to profile Internet users' machines, such as information about the browser and plug-ins being used, the operating system, TCP/IP packet headers, and sometimes cookies without any personally identifying information.

The Ponemon study found that 78% of the 551 adult Internet users surveyed believe online merchants, banks, and social networks should use technology, such as a "cookie" or software, to safeguard customers. But only 21% wanted to see online sites demand more personal data for authentication.

Almost 70% of respondents indicated that they could accept having their computers authenticated as part of an online purchase and 75% expressed a preference for computer authentication because it's easier than remembering passwords or answering questions about personal history.

Despite this, respondents also expressed worries that device identification could lead to exposure of personal information (33%) and that merchants might misuse device authentication data (12%).

The study demonstrates broad concern about online fraud but reluctance to be bothered with knowledge-based authentication or passwords. Consumers, in other words, want security but don't want to work for it.

In a phone interview, Larry Ponemon, chairman and founder of the Ponemon Institute, said the acceptance of device profiling was a surprise given the longstanding privacy worries about cookies and other tracking mechanisms.

"People are more likely to feel that the anonymity of a technology is more important than the privacy it creates," he said.

Avivah Litan, a Gartner VP and analyst who focuses on financial fraud, acknowledged that device identification is being used by online banks and credit card issuers to help prevent account takeovers. But she said the technology has limits.

"It's not foolproof at all," she said. "If a cyber criminal takes over your browser, it won't work."

The technology is most useful, she said, as one layer among many.


Get all the data from this year's InformationWeek 500 survey free for a limited time. Our report examines business and technology best practices as well as IT investment trends among the nation's most innovative IT users. It also provides industry comparisons against which you can benchmark your company's strategies. Download the report here (registration required).

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Dark Reading Must Reads - September 25, 2014
Dark Reading's new Must Reads is a compendium of our best recent coverage of identity and access management. Learn about access control in the age of HTML5, how to improve authentication, why Active Directory is dead, and more.
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2012-5485
Published: 2014-09-30
registerConfiglet.py in Plone before 4.2.3 and 4.3 before beta 1 allows remote attackers to execute Python code via unspecified vectors, related to the admin interface.

CVE-2012-5486
Published: 2014-09-30
ZPublisher.HTTPRequest._scrubHeader in Zope 2 before 2.13.19, as used in Plone before 4.3 beta 1, allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary HTTP headers via a linefeed (LF) character.

CVE-2012-5487
Published: 2014-09-30
The sandbox whitelisting function (allowmodule.py) in Plone before 4.2.3 and 4.3 before beta 1 allows remote authenticated users with certain privileges to bypass the Python sandbox restriction and execute arbitrary Python code via vectors related to importing.

CVE-2012-5488
Published: 2014-09-30
python_scripts.py in Plone before 4.2.3 and 4.3 before beta 1 allows remote attackers to execute Python code via a crafted URL, related to createObject.

CVE-2012-5489
Published: 2014-09-30
The App.Undo.UndoSupport.get_request_var_or_attr function in Zope before 2.12.21 and 3.13.x before 2.13.11, as used in Plone before 4.2.3 and 4.3 before beta 1, allows remote authenticated users to gain access to restricted attributes via unspecified vectors.

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
In our next Dark Reading Radio broadcast, we’ll take a close look at some of the latest research and practices in application security.