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.

Comments
Password Reuse Abounds, New Survey Shows
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
BrianN060
50%
50%
BrianN060,
User Rank: Ninja
7/28/2018 | 12:48:44 PM
Re: Password "best practices" are the real problem.
A recent DR webinar ( Improving Enterprise Authentication ), points out some important points and positives concerning passwords.  This is from one slide:

Passwords - The Necessary Evil of Authentication

• Passwords are an individuals first and most prevalent interaction with security

• Negative impressions tend to stay with individuals 

• Passwords remain viable due to their ability to be changed, no need for extra technology, and ease of use 

•  Biometrics suffer from lack of changeability 

•  Token based solutions require user to have something with them at all times 

• Security professionals have created negative view and challenges associated with passwords 

•  Focused on impressions of threats instead of research supported evidence 

•  Implemented irrational complexity rules and requirements 

•  LophtCrack created password anxiety in late 1990's that still  persists today 

 

I'd note that in the article on which we're commenting, some of the same negative impressions are cited, such as: "The situation is equally depressing around the issue of password change."  I think that's, to some extent, perpetuating some misconceptions, or outdated assumptions, about best practices concerning passwords; namely that periodic change of passwords provides important security benefits. 

Most are aware of the downsides of frequent PW change, most notably that users are confronted with new generated passwords, or they are forced to create something new and memorable; and not just any password, but a "strong" password - that strength metric based largely on complexity - which makes creation more burdensome, and remembering more of a challenge.  An almost inevitable side effect (ought to be put on the warning label), of burdening users with this standard password vulnerability Rx, is to promote the far greater predisposition is password reuse.  So, the cure ends up doing more harm than the disease! 

Is frequent PW change a cure for what ails you (security-wise)?  Probably not; not when a strong attack can leverage the cracking power available today.  Will you force users to accept or create new strong passwords every day, every hour?  Even that won't be frequent enough in all cases. 

Also, does a password's strength reside in complexity (mix of different alphanumeric character types)?  I've seen studies where the principal protection resides in password length.  Anyone around long enough to remember when PW length first was stipulated (even, when you couldn't enter more than 8 characters), saw these "minimums" go from 4 to 6, to 8 to ...; and most users would use exactly the minimum - which meant to crackers that they knew the probable length of the passwords they needed to crack! 

Strength in numbers (number of characters in a PW), makes sense, as a variable (not all users will use the same large number), large number will drive up required processing power to crack, more than complexity.  Never forget that password reuse can provide a kind of wormhole through the security-spacetime continuum, allowing attackers to arrive at their destination in the blink of an eye. 

Adding in complexity helps; but not if that overburdens users, as will happen if you enforce frequent PW changing! 

I recommend only enforcing PW change when there is evidence of a data breach (another kind of wormhole through for attackers).  Lord help you if that happens every 30 days. 

Use passphrases, rather than passwords.  Phrases naturally tend to be longer than words, and more immune to dictionary-attacks; even ones factoring in the use of "$" for an "S", or "4" for (do I have to say it?).  Phrases without spaces between words are even better (less vulnerable, as the start and end of component words are not delineated), and aren't harder to remember.  Throw in some proper nouns, and you've really made things tough for crackers. 

Will such passphrases be invulnerable to the most powerful attacks?  No.  No surprise there.  But in targeting an organization with dozens, hundreds, thousands of users, who will ever be able to afford the resources to force all of them?  That's just what many attacks do: look for the weakest links, the low hanging fruit, the chinks in the armor....  If all your links are pretty darn strong, fruit high up in the tree - and without wormholes! - you'll be a lot safer than by enforcing assumed "best practices" from yesteryear. 

 
BrianN060
50%
50%
BrianN060,
User Rank: Ninja
7/27/2018 | 2:47:59 PM
Mr. Monk: "Here's what happened"
Monk season 7, episode 11 (numerically lucky for me that I watched it), has the former SFPD detective solve a case based on his knowledge of motivations and patterns of human behavior.  When a researcher's bicycle is stolen, then tossed a few minutes after the theft, Monk realizes that it was the lock (digital, using a keypad to enter the unlocking code - with a secret keylogger incorporated in the design), that the thieves were after.  Monk (and the thieves), knew that if the bike's owner already used an 8 digit combination for a security door lock, he might well set the same sequence for an 8 digit bicycle lock given to him as a gift (from the thieves).  Far easier to remember one 8 digit number than two. 

I don't think it takes a great detective to see the parallels to password and PIN reuse.  While actual keyloggers are a threat, access to the user/password data of a low security (and perceived as inconsequential), website can provide better means to a rewarding end (and one that doesn't leave a physical or digital "paper trail"). 

The TV series ended before Monk provided viewers with his "best practices" for password use; but we've done pretty well thinking through some strategies which can get us at least part way towards an ultimate solution.  One more lesson we can take from episode 7/11 is that newfangled solutions which make things easier for us, might just make things easier for clever thieves - those with full faith in fingerprint or facial recognition authentication/authorization ought to spend a bit more time assessing their choice (at least a fraction of the time  next-gen thieves will on exploiting our overconfidence).  
DM3D
50%
50%
DM3D,
User Rank: Apprentice
5/7/2018 | 10:14:13 PM
References
Hi Jay, Thanks for the interesting article. When citing third party surveys and reports, would you mind provide references (ideally with direct links)? Best regards, David
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
5/1/2018 | 3:03:03 PM
Issue is compounded
This issue is compounded by the fact that passwords are a very weak form of authentication. This is why password retention and password complexity policies need to be invoked.


AI Is Everywhere, but Don't Ignore the Basics
Howie Xu, Vice President of AI and Machine Learning at Zscaler,  9/10/2019
Fed Kaspersky Ban Made Permanent by New Rules
Dark Reading Staff 9/11/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
7 Threats & Disruptive Forces Changing the Face of Cybersecurity
This Dark Reading Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at the biggest emerging threats and disruptive forces that are changing the face of cybersecurity today.
Flash Poll
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
Your enterprise's cyber risk may depend upon the relationship between the IT team and the security team. Heres some insight on what's working and what isn't in the data center.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-4147
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-16
IBM Sterling File Gateway 2.2.0.0 through 6.0.1.0 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 158413.
CVE-2019-5481
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-16
Double-free vulnerability in the FTP-kerberos code in cURL 7.52.0 to 7.65.3.
CVE-2019-5482
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-16
Heap buffer overflow in the TFTP protocol handler in cURL 7.19.4 to 7.65.3.
CVE-2019-15741
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-16
An issue was discovered in GitLab Omnibus 7.4 through 12.2.1. An unsafe interaction with logrotate could result in a privilege escalation
CVE-2019-16370
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-16
The PGP signing plugin in Gradle before 6.0 relies on the SHA-1 algorithm, which might allow an attacker to replace an artifact with a different one that has the same SHA-1 message digest, a related issue to CVE-2005-4900.