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.

Perimeter

12/29/2011
04:33 PM
Taher Elgamal
Taher Elgamal
Commentary
50%
50%

More About Software Tokens

When software tokens are as strong as hardware ones

My recent post on software tokens generated interesting feedback. I wanted to elaborate a bit more on how soft tokens can be, in fact, as strong as hardware tokens -- perhaps even better in terms of security.

It is important to decide which threats we are protecting from. If we are interested in protecting against malware that tracks memory locations and is capable of obtaining the secrets from memory while a program is executing, then storing the secret keys in software or hardware tokens would not yield the desired protection. In fact, there is no difference between the security of either model. The only way to protect against this type of malware is to execute any operation using the secret in a trusted environment.

If protecting against cracking a password that was used to decrypt an encrypted key file, then solutions are available that make software and hardware tokens equivalent in terms of security.

I encourage readers to check out the Arcot systems scheme. Arcot is now part of CA Technologies, actually. Its scheme protects secret keys as well as OTP seeds and the like in a way that prevents an attacker who has access to the stored encrypted files from obtaining the secrets.

Recognized in the industry as the "inventor of SSL," Dr. Taher Elgamal led the SSL efforts at Netscape. He also wrote the SSL patent and promoted SSL as the Internet security standard within standard committees and the industry. Dr. Elgamal invented several industry and government standards in data security and digital signatures area, including the DSS government standard for digital signatures. He holds a Ph.D. and M.S. in Computer Science from Stanford University.

 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Ian Farquhar
50%
50%
Ian Farquhar,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/12/2012 | 2:01:42 AM
re: More About Software Tokens
If a threat model includes a malicious entity which can read memory, there is still a very significant difference between hard and soft tokens.

For a hard token, that entity will be able to access a single derived token code.- That token code will be useful for a single authentication session.- Where the token code function includes time, this further limits the usefulness of the token code.

For a soft token, the seed/keying material will be in memory, where it is vulnerable.- When captured, it facilitates on-going use which could generate on-going valid token codes.

Consequently, I believe that the statement "there is no difference between the security of either model" is dubious.

Finally, I was wondering if Dr. ElGamal would like to comment on Wikipedia's claim that he is an advisor to Arcot Systems.- As Dr. ElGamal is encouraging readers to evaluate their products, I would think that disclosure to be appropriate.

Full disclosure: I am an employee of RSA working as a technology advisor, although my comments above are my own.
RichieB
50%
50%
RichieB,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/8/2012 | 12:05:04 PM
re: More About Software Tokens
There is an important difference between software and hardware
authentication tokens: uniqueness. Software tokens can be copied and
misused afterwards. Always. The Arcot system seems to be resistant
against brute force attacks, which is great. This means the password
will need to be stolen along with the key files. This can be done using
malware, keyloggers, etc.

I agree that using a hardware
token on a compromised system leaves the session vulnerable after
authentication. But you can rest assured that when you remove the token
and power off the computer, nobody can do a fresh authentication
pretending to be you without physical access to that token. Because by
design, the secret key material inside the hardware token cannot be
copied.

So in environments where you need to be 100% sure
that the person authenticating is someone you know, and not someone who
made a copy of the key material, use a hardware PKI token. And make sure
lost or stolen tokens are reported and disabled immediately.
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/3/2020
Pen Testers Who Got Arrested Doing Their Jobs Tell All
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  8/5/2020
New 'Nanodegree' Program Provides Hands-On Cybersecurity Training
Nicole Ferraro, Contributing Writer,  8/3/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal, a Dark Reading Perspective
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
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
This special report takes a look at how enterprises are using threat intelligence, as well as emerging best practices for integrating threat intel into security operations and incident response. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-15820
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-08
In JetBrains YouTrack before 2020.2.6881, the markdown parser could disclose hidden file existence.
CVE-2020-15821
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-08
In JetBrains YouTrack before 2020.2.6881, a user without permission is able to create an article draft.
CVE-2020-15823
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-08
JetBrains YouTrack before 2020.2.8873 is vulnerable to SSRF in the Workflow component.
CVE-2020-15824
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-08
In JetBrains Kotlin before 1.4.0, there is a script-cache privilege escalation vulnerability due to kotlin-main-kts cached scripts in the system temp directory, which is shared by all users by default.
CVE-2020-15825
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-08
In JetBrains TeamCity before 2020.1, users with the Modify Group permission can elevate other users' privileges.