Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Endpoint

12/7/2016
10:30 AM
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail vvv
50%
50%

Biometric Technology Is Not A Cure-All For Password Woes

No single authentication token is infallible. The only real solution is multifactor authentication.

Authentication is the cornerstone of information security. At the highest level, security is focused on providing access controls and protection to people or things you trust. If you can't reliably verify the identity of trusted users, access controls break down.

Our trust in authentication systems has eroded of late, largely because of the seemingly endless torrent of massive credential leaks from well-known Web service providers. For example, in mid-November we learned attackers accessed around 330 million AdultFriendFinder accounts, including plaintext and hashed passwords. Researchers have already cracked 99.3% of those passwords. This deluge of credential leaks has caused the security industry to re-examine our authentication systems, and especially our reliance on passwords.

At present, biometric tokens are the industry's solution to this problem. Whether it's a traditional fingerprint or face scan, or a more innovative option such as your heartbeat or brainwaves, the industry has turned to biometrics to solve two major password problems: convenience and difficulties creating a "strong" authentication token.

A strong authentication token is one that uniquely correlates to you, but others can't know, claim, guess, or replicate. That's why security experts recommend using long, almost random passwords. Unfortunately, it's difficult to remember strong and unique passwords. A biometric such as a fingerprint, on the other hand, is unique by definition.

The second issue is convenience. If you follow all the best practices, passwords are very strong. For example, if you use unique, 24-character, random passwords for every device and website you log on to, it would be very difficult for attackers to steal your credentials. As long as the organization storing your password hashed it, the length of your password would make it too time-consuming to crack. The problem is that no human will realistically do this without some sort of tool to help. Following security best practices results in passwords that are very difficult to memorize. Therefore, the idea that you could just pick up a device and look at it or touch it to log on with biometrics is very appealing to users.

So far, biometric technology sounds great! What's the problem?

First, I should note that biometrics will play an integral role in future authentication. However, we must realize the technology isn't a panacea. If implemented improperly, or without regard to some of the password problems that got us here in the first place, biometrics could just be the fresh coat of paint that hides the rot inside our walls.

Many of the issues with biometrics have been widely discussed, so I won't rehash them in detail. For instance, many researchers have proven it's not overly difficult to replicate certain biometrics. For instance, researchers have fooled fingerprint readers with Play-Doh and got past facial scanners with a special pair of glasses. Furthermore, early biometric solutions stored their "digital" biometric data on a server, rather than limiting it to the client. This could make those servers susceptible to the same types of data breaches that have leaked passwords. In fact, fingerprints of millions of government employees were stolen in a June 2015 data breach at the US Office of Personnel Management. Like passwords before them, biometrics aren't infallible.

The bigger issue here is that biometrics haven't replaced passwords; they've just hidden them. New operating systems such as Windows 10 with Hello and mobile devices with Touch ID are incorporating biometrics, but they still require you to set a password. This could be because biometrics aren't perfect yet and we need backup authentication options, or it could be that it takes time to phase out legacy technology before we can rely on biometrics alone. In either case, the password is still there, and it exposes the same risks it always did. Relying on biometric authentication could also lull users into following poor password practices, making them less secure overall.

What's the Solution?
I don't think passwords are the problem. Instead, I believe no authentication token is infallible. The only real solution to this problem is multifactor authentication (MFA). Right now, we use biometrics as a single token replacement for passwords. We need to use biometrics as one of at least two tokens.

Also, we can't forget the convenience problem. Users will bypass our security practices if they are too impractical, so we should remember that certain types of multifactor solutions could feel inconvenient. However, if we pair a biometric with, say, a proximity-based authentication token from a phone, then users get the benefit of MFA without the hassle.

In the end, biometric security methods are great, but not by themselves. If we simply replace one single-factor solution with another, we're dooming ourselves to relive past problems. If our devices retain backup authentication options, such as passwords, we still expose those legacy risks. The only solution in my opinion is to never accept any authentication token by itself. 

Related Content:

Corey Nachreiner regularly contributes to security publications and speaks internationally at leading industry trade shows like RSA. He has written thousands of security alerts and educational articles and is the primary contributor to the WatchGuard Security Center blog, ... View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 9/25/2020
Hacking Yourself: Marie Moe and Pacemaker Security
Gary McGraw Ph.D., Co-founder Berryville Institute of Machine Learning,  9/21/2020
Startup Aims to Map and Track All the IT and Security Things
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  9/22/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
Flash Poll
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
The COVID-19 pandemic turned the world -- and enterprise computing -- on end. Here's a look at how cybersecurity teams are retrenching their defense strategies, rebuilding their teams, and selecting new technologies to stop the oncoming rise of online attacks.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-15208
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In tensorflow-lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, when determining the common dimension size of two tensors, TFLite uses a `DCHECK` which is no-op outside of debug compilation modes. Since the function always returns the dimension of the first tensor, malicious attackers can ...
CVE-2020-15209
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In tensorflow-lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, a crafted TFLite model can force a node to have as input a tensor backed by a `nullptr` buffer. This can be achieved by changing a buffer index in the flatbuffer serialization to convert a read-only tensor to a read-write one....
CVE-2020-15210
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In tensorflow-lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, if a TFLite saved model uses the same tensor as both input and output of an operator, then, depending on the operator, we can observe a segmentation fault or just memory corruption. We have patched the issue in d58c96946b and ...
CVE-2020-15211
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In TensorFlow Lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, saved models in the flatbuffer format use a double indexing scheme: a model has a set of subgraphs, each subgraph has a set of operators and each operator has a set of input/output tensors. The flatbuffer format uses indices f...
CVE-2020-15212
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In TensorFlow Lite before versions 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, models using segment sum can trigger writes outside of bounds of heap allocated buffers by inserting negative elements in the segment ids tensor. Users having access to `segment_ids_data` can alter `output_index` and then write to outside of `outpu...