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.

Vulnerabilities / Threats

Researchers Show Vulnerabilities in Facial Recognition

The algorithms that check for a user's 'liveness' have blind spots that can lead to vulnerabilities.

BLACK HAT USA 2019 – Las Vegas – The multifactor authentication that some have touted as the future of secure authentication is itself vulnerable to hacks as complex as injected video streams and as simple as tape on a pair of eyeglasses. That was the message delivered by a researcher at Black Hat USA earlier today.

Researchers Yu Chen, Bin Ma, and Zhuo (HC) Ma of Tencent Security's Zuanwu Lab were scheduled to speak here at Black Hat USA, but Visa denials left HC Ma alone on the stage. He said his colleagues had begun the research to find out how biometric authentication was being implemented and, specifically, how the routines designed to separate a living human from a photo or other fake were put into practice.

"Previous studies focused on how to generate fake audio or video, but bypassing 'liveness detection' is necessary for a real attack," Ma said, citing some of the techniques researchers and fiction authors have used to do so.

Most liveness detection is based on a variety of factors, from body temperature (for fingerprint scans) and playback reverberation (for voice recognition) to focus blur and frequency response distortion in facial recognition.

During his presentation, Ma focused on facial recognition as the most complex of the techniques. In the first demonstration, he showed a method the team developed for injecting a video stream into an authentication device between the optical sensor (camera) and processor. This technique, he said, had to consider issues like latency – too much will trigger the system's defense mechanisms –information loss, and remaining sufficiently "transparent" to avoid detection by the system's defenses.

While this injection is certainly possible, Ma said it is not a practical attack method because it involves so many pieces, from capturing video of the user to physical possession of the authentication device.

This realization led to further research; Ma said a breakthrough occurred when the team looked at the specifics of live facial recognition algorithms.

Part of the test for facial liveness involves checking for a 3D image — essentially, making sure the face is on a rounded skull. The researchers found that when glasses are worn, the area within the lens of the glasses is evaluated as a 2D image. And on that flat plane lay the vulnerability.

Eyes, it turns out, are merely white dots on a dark patch. The dark patch serves as the eye's retinas, and the white dot represents highlights indicating the eyes are looking at the camera. If you put pieces of black tape on the center of eyeglass lenses, then put a small piece of white tape on the black, the facial recognition system sees attentive human eyes.

In a humorous demo, Ma showed someone gently sliding eyeglasses onto a supposedly sleeping victim, then picking up a phone and holding it up to the victim to unlock the device. Realistic practice would take more effort, but the point was made — the liveness test is vulnerable.

This vulnerability exists, Ma said, because system designers must walk a tightrope between tight security and user friendliness. He suggested that sliding down that tightrope in the direction of security may be necessary to prevent criminals from finding more easily implemented hacks to unlock devices secured by multifactor authentication.

Related Content:

Curtis Franklin Jr. is Senior Editor at Dark Reading. In this role he focuses on product and technology coverage for the publication. In addition he works on audio and video programming for Dark Reading and contributes to activities at Interop ITX, Black Hat, INsecurity, and ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
JohnW891
50%
50%
JohnW891,
User Rank: Apprentice
8/12/2019 | 2:04:18 PM
There's More To This
Face recognition is a part of face biometrics that includes face authentication, a materially different approach. Recognition is based entirely on image matching. There is no liveness detection, the primary differentiator that allows an authentication system to both verify what the camera sees with what is on file *and* determine whether that "correct" person is actually alive at the time of the access request. But, not in that order.

Liveness detection (liveness.com) is key to actual authentication because is assess, literally, dozens of unique human attributes to determine that *together* they add up to a real human. If the liveness test isn't passed first, there is no need to match images. This prevents things like detailed masks, 4K video, etc. from standing in for the real person.

In addition, the data acquisition method for recognition is based on 2D images. In true authentication, 3D images provide far more signal to work with. This is why Face ID, even though it has no liveness detection, works better most of the time than the legacy algorithms that have powered recognition for, literally, decades. It has more to work with to make a more accurate match. But, as was seen (just look it up on YouTube), it's easy to spoof. And Apple will *never* subject it's tech to a transparent test, so we only have social proof to work with.

This is old news.
The Mainframe Is Seeing a Resurgence. Is Security Keeping Pace?
Ray Overby, Co-Founder & President at Key Resources, Inc.,  8/15/2019
The Flaw in Vulnerability Management: It's Time to Get Real
Jim Souders, Chief Executive Officer at Adaptiva,  8/15/2019
Tough Love: Debunking Myths about DevOps & Security
Jeff Williams, CTO, Contrast Security,  8/19/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
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-2019-5638
PUBLISHED: 2019-08-21
Rapid7 Nexpose versions 6.5.50 and prior suffer from insufficient session expiration when an administrator performs a security relevant edit on an existing, logged on user. For example, if a user's password is changed by an administrator due to an otherwise unrelated credential leak, that user accou...
CVE-2019-6177
PUBLISHED: 2019-08-21
A vulnerability reported in Lenovo Solution Center version 03.12.003, which is no longer supported, could allow log files to be written to non-standard locations, potentially leading to privilege escalation. Lenovo ended support for Lenovo Solution Center and recommended that customers migrate to Le...
CVE-2019-10687
PUBLISHED: 2019-08-21
KBPublisher 6.0.2.1 has SQL Injection via the admin/index.php?module=report entry_id[0] parameter, the admin/index.php?module=log id parameter, or an index.php?View=print&id[]= request.
CVE-2019-11601
PUBLISHED: 2019-08-21
A directory traversal vulnerability in remote access to backup & restore in earlier versions than ProSyst mBS SDK 8.2.6 and Bosch IoT Gateway Software 9.2.0 allows remote attackers to write or delete files at any location.
CVE-2019-11602
PUBLISHED: 2019-08-21
Leakage of stack traces in remote access to backup & restore in earlier versions than ProSyst mBS SDK 8.2.6 and Bosch IoT Gateway Software 9.2.0 allows remote attackers to gather information about the file system structure.